Judgment 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner desirous of being appointed to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police made an application in terms of advertisement issued therefor, his application was accepted. He was called for physical test. He appeared and was declared eligible for written test. Now just before the written test his candidature is sought to be cancelled by Zonal I.G.-cum-Chair-man of the Central Selection Board I, Patna. The ground for cancellation is that in terms of clause of the said Advertisement No. 704, a person residing in Bihar had to file his application before the D.I.G. within whose jurisdiction he resided or in the alternative before the D.I.G. within whose jurisdiction the address for correspondence falls. For applicant from outside the State of Bihar, the application had to be filed before D.I.G., Central Range, Patna. 3. The petitioner though a permanent resident of Sugauli, District-East Champaran presently resided at Allahabad where his father is posted and as such in his application he has mentioned his permanent residence at Sugauli, District-East Champaran and correspondence address being of Allahabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh. 4. As per his understanding as his correspondence address was not that of Bihar, the first part of clause 11 did not apply to him and he was basically an applicant from outside Bihar. He accordingly filed his application before D.I.G., Central Range, Patna. After physical test an objection has been raised and his candidature is sought to be cancelled on the ground that he ought to have filed his application before D.I.G., East Champaran, Bettiah and having not filed there, his candidature was being cancelled. 5. In its counter affidavit the State has taken a stand that provisions of clause 11 are mandatory in application and filing of application at the wrong office though for the same post would render such application fit to be rejected. 6. Petitioner, on the other hand, submitted that clause 11 is not mandatory inasmuch as once applications are filed in response to an advertisement they have to be scrutinised for other eligibility condition. Physical test is taken and the candidate must pass in the written examination. It is his later requirements which are material and not where applications are to be filed. In other words, clause 11 is not such a clause which could be used to disqualify a person. The clause is not a clause of substance. Physical test is taken and the candidate must pass in the written examination. It is his later requirements which are material and not where applications are to be filed. In other words, clause 11 is not such a clause which could be used to disqualify a person. The clause is not a clause of substance. It is a clause for administrative convenience of the authority. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties I am satisfied that the writ petition must succeed and the impugned cancelling the candidature of the petitioner is liable to be quashed. 8. A reading of clause 11 would show that a permanent resident of Bihar with correspondence address has option to file the application at either of the two places but an application from outside Bihar is to be filed before D.I.G., Central Range, Patna. There is no provision as to where a resident of Bihar with correspondence address outside Bihar has to file his application. This clause deals with no material part of selection process. It does not deal with eligibility requirement or merit of the candidate. It has to be so interpreted keeping in mind that it is not a clause which is of much substance. The petitioner bonafidely felt that as he was residing outside the State, though permanent resident of the State, he would be an applicant from outside the State and accordingly filed the application at Patna. The application was accepted. It was not rejected. He was called for physical test. He qualified in the physical test. Now it is said that his candidature is being cancelled on the solitary ground as above. This has nothing to do with either his physical fitness or his merit. 9. To my mind, even if the view taken by the Zonal I.G., Patna that application ought to have been filed before the D.I.G., Champaran is correct, that would not lead to cancellation of candidature of the petitioner, once his form was accepted. This has nothing to do with either his physical fitness or his merit. 9. To my mind, even if the view taken by the Zonal I.G., Patna that application ought to have been filed before the D.I.G., Champaran is correct, that would not lead to cancellation of candidature of the petitioner, once his form was accepted. If the view of I.G. is assumed to be correct then at the stage of submission of form, the form ought to have been returned and even at this stage the form can be forwarded to D.I.G., Champaran or even retain at Patna, At this stage it makes little difference as once having passed in the physical test he has now only to sit in written examination, which has little to do with his residence. 10. In that view of the matter, I am of the opinion that for the reasons aforesaid the cancellation of candidature of the petitioner was not justified specially at this late stage when the petitioner cannot rectify the situation. 11. In the result, the impugned order, as contained in Annexure-2, dated 6.6.2006 is quashed and it is held that the petitioners application has been validly filed and he is entitled to participate in the written examination and other subsequent processes in accordance with law. 12. The writ petition is allowed.