JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. The challenge herein is to the judgment dated 29.5.2012 of learned single Judge passed in CWP No. 846 of 2010, whereby while up holding the selection of the 2nd respondent as Driver in the 1st respondent-Board, dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant-writ petitioner. 2. The legality and validity of the impugned judgment has been assailed on the ground inter-alia that the interpolations in the result sheet by the members of Selection Committee, most probably escaped the notice of learned single Judge. The marks below column “Road Sign and Motor Mechanism” 7 awarded to the 2nd respondent have been interpolated by way of over writing. Figure 7 in the result sheet at different places has been differently indicated which allegedly reveals that either Selection Committee or the officers in the department had interpolated the record. Further, no marks were given to the writ petitioner for experience. 3. On going through the writ record and hearing learned counsel representing the appellant-writ petitioner, we proceed to dispose of this appeal in limine, as for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter, in the result sheet neither we find any interpolation of such a nature so as to render the selection process doubtful nor any substance in the contentions raised in this appeal. 4. The perusal of result-sheet, Annexure P-5 to the writ petition reveals that the name of the writ petitioner figures at Serial No. 11 thereof. Below the column “Road Sign and Motor Mechanism” he has been awarded 7 marks, however, this figure has not been interpolated by cutting or scoring out any other figure and rather the pen/pencil used for writing the same seems to be re-used which cannot be termed as over writing. True it is that figure 7 as occurring in the result-sheet at different places has been differently written, but being written so clearly and without there being any cutting or over writing, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that the record has been fabricated or tampered with. We are thus of the considered opinion that there is no interpolation or over writing of such a nature so as to render the selection process doubtful or the selection proceedings vitiated. 5. We are thus of the considered opinion that there is no interpolation or over writing of such a nature so as to render the selection process doubtful or the selection proceedings vitiated. 5. The writ petitioner has rightly not been awarded any marks for experience for the reason that as per categoric stand in reply to the writ petition filed by the 1st respondent, he never produced any experience certificate either alongwith his application or at the time of interview. There is no rejoinder thereto and as such, mere annexing the copy of the so called experience certificate (Annexure P-6) to the writ petition does not substantiate the claim of the writ petitioner for award of marks for experience, as he failed to produce the experience certificate either with his application or at the time of his interview. Annexure P-1 pertains to he having passed the test in the trade of Motor Driving from Industrial Training Institute Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh which by any stretch of imagination cannot be termed as an experience certificate, as claimed in the present appeal. 6. Learned single Judge has decided this issue also correctly after appreciating the pleadings and the material available on record in its right perspective. 7. In view of the foregoing reasons, we find no merit in the present appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. 8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.