Judgment Ajay Rastogi, J.-At joint request and with consent of both the parties, matter has been heard finally and disposed of at admission stage. 2. By instant petition, petitioner is seeking direction for awarding 10 bonus marks for his participation in State level Games competition and seeking appointment on the basis of participation in selection for the post of Physical Training Instructor-III ("P.T.I."). 3. In pursuance of advertisement dated 13.08.2003 (Annexure 1), petitioner being eligible applied for alongwith testimonials besides caste and bona fide resident certificates, as also certificate (Annexure 9) of his participation in State Level Games Competition in Hockey-Volleyball. As per scheme laid down by respondents for preparing merit list, those who have participated in State/National Level Games, are awarded additional bonus marks -10 for State Level and 15 for National Level Games. 4. Grievance of petitioner is that despite he participated in State Level Games as per certificate (Annexure 9), 10 bonus marks were not awarded to him while preparing merit list - in absence whereof he could not fall in the merit for consideration of his appointment in question, which resulted in denial of fair consideration, and their action is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In support of his contention, Counsel for petitioner place reliance upon decisions of this Court in Madhu Sudan Joshi vs. State, 2005 (2) RLR 271, Dara Singh vs. State, 2005 WLC (UC) 426 and Manju Budania, 2006 (1) WLC 471. 5. Respondents in their reply has not disputed that those who have participated in State/National Level Games, are entitled for awarding of bonus marks - 10 for State Level and 15 for National Level Games, but only objection raised is that certificate produced by petitioner alongwith his application was not duly attested by competent authority - in absence whereof , he was not considered for awarding 10 bonus marks and as per merit list prepared, name of petitioner could not find place for consideration of appointment in question. 6. I have considered contentions of Counsel for the parties and with their assistance, examined material on record. Respondents have not disputed genuineness of certificate about his participation in State Level Games (Annexure-9), and that apart, they have also not disputed that those have participated in State/National Level Games, are entitled for awarding of bonus marks - 10 for State Level and 15 for National Level Games. Respondents have not disputed genuineness of certificate about his participation in State Level Games (Annexure-9), and that apart, they have also not disputed that those have participated in State/National Level Games, are entitled for awarding of bonus marks - 10 for State Level and 15 for National Level Games. Their only objection is that certificate (Annexure-9), ibid, was not duly attested and signed by competent authority. However, it has not been disclosed as to who is the authority competent, whose signatures are required for attestation on such certificate. A bare perusal of certificate (Annexure-9) depicts that it is duly singed by an Officer of the Government. Very objection raised by respondent that requisite certificate is not signed or countersigned by competent authority, holder of such certificate is not entitled for bonus marks, has been considered by this Court in Judgment s referred to by Counsel for petitioner and this Court has considered that genuineness of Sport certificate once if not disputed, merely because of it being not signed by authority, even if there is provision contemplated, that itself will not deprive an incumbent from bonus marks as per scheme laid down by respondents, otherwise it affects his right of fair consideration for appointment. I am in full agreement with the view expressed by Co-ordinate bench of this Court in the case (Supra). 7. Consequently, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Respondents are directed to consider candidature of petitioner for appointment to the post of PTI-III after awarding of 10 bonus marks on the basis of certificate (Annexure 9) and in case after awarding of 10 bonus marks, if any person who stands lower in merit has been appointed, candidature of petitioner should be considered for appointment from the date lower meritorious persons were given appointment. However, it is made clear that petitioner would be entitled to pecuniary benefits from the date of his joining service but would be entitled for continuity of service and also notional benefits from the date of appointment of incumbents who are lower in merit. No costs.