Mandatory production of original certificates during document verification is a non-derogable condition for awarding bonus marks for experience.

The petitioner applied for the post of Senior Technician (Electrical) at Government Medical College, Kanker, pursuant to an advertisement dated 05.01.2022

The petitioner sought the award of 10 additional marks for work experience, which he claimed to possess

However, his candidature was rejected via order dated 13.02.2026 because he failed to produce the original experience certificate during the mandatory document verification stage

The petitioner challenged this rejection, alleging discrimination by citing the case of another candidate, Pranab Mandal, whose experience was considered during the claims and objections stage

The State contended that the advertisement and Clause 4 of the applicable Rules made the production of original documents at the time of verification mandatory, and no subsequent submissions were permitted

1. Whether the rejection of the petitioner’s candidature for failure to produce original experience certificates at the time of document verification was arbitrary or discriminatory.

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of 10 bonus marks for experience despite failing to comply with the procedural requirements of the recruitment process.

The Court applied the principle of strict adherence to the terms and conditions of a public advertisement and governing recruitment rules

It relied on Clause 4 of the applicable recruitment Rules and the specific stipulations in the advertisement dated 05.01.2022, which mandated the production of original educational and experience documents at the time of verification

The Court further upheld the procedural rule that documents not produced at the designated verification stage cannot be entertained at a subsequent stage

The Court observed that the requirement to produce original documents during verification was a clear and specific condition mentioned in both the advertisement and the subsequent notice issued to candidates

The petitioner admitted that he did not produce the original experience certificate during the verification process

The Court distinguished the petitioner's case from that of Pranab Mandal; the latter had submitted his certificate at the verification stage and merely raised an objection regarding the marks awarded, whereas the petitioner failed to submit the document entirely at the relevant time

The Court reasoned that once a governing condition stipulates that documents not produced at the verification stage will not be considered later, the authorities are bound by that rule

Consequently, the petitioner cannot claim bonuses or challenge the rejection when the fault lay in his non-compliance with mandatory procedures

The Court held that a candidate who fails to produce original documents at the mandated stage of verification as prescribed by the advertisement has no right to claim benefits based on those documents subsequently

The writ petition was dismissed, and the prayer to quash the rejection order and the appointment of respondent No. 7 was denied