JUDGMENT 1. - These writ petitions have been filed by petitioners against refusal of the Staff Selection Board to permit them to appear in medical examination for appointment on the post of Constable (GD) in CISF, CRPF, BSF & SSB-2011. They appeared in physical test and were declared successful on 20.04.2011. They were called for written examination, which was held on 05.06.2011 in which also, they were declared successful. Their result was declared on 30.06.2011. Thereafter, petitioners were called for medical examination. They appeared before the Medical Board at Medical Centre Code No.2409 Group Centre-I CRPF, Ajmer on 08.08.2011. When the petitioners appeared on that day and filled the medial form, respondents obtained their signatures on the medical form, which they appended to the application form. However, respondents rejected the applications of the petitioners and did not permit them to appear in the medical examination mentioning that "capital signatures are not allowed". 2. Learned counsel for petitioners have relied on division bench judgment of this court dated 28.05.2013 in Sarwan Ram v. The Union of India and Others - D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13032/2011 , in which also the Railway Recruitment Board advertised certain posts of Group-D from Ex-Servicemen. Advertisement required the applications to be submitted by the applicants affixing their photographs in military uniform. The application of the petitioner was rejected for his failure to affix the photograph in military uniform. This court declared the aforesaid condition as illegal and arbitrary, more particularly when the discharge certificate produced by the petitioner proved his status as that of an ex-army personnel. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents in reply to the writ petitions have taken the same stand to justify the debarment of the petitioners from appearing in the examination. In support of the argument, learned counsel for the respondents relied on a division bench judgment dated 06.12.2011 of the Punjab-Haryana High Court in Manpreet Kaur Randhawa v. Baba Farid University of Health, and single bench judgment of that court dated 30.09.211 in Avtar Singh v. Union of India and Another - Civil Writ Petition No.13810/2011 (O&M) , which are distinguishable on facts of the present cases. 4. On consideration of rival submissions and analysis of the material on record, this court does not find any justifiable reason for rejecting candidature of the petitioners only because they appended their signatures in capital letters in the application form. 4. On consideration of rival submissions and analysis of the material on record, this court does not find any justifiable reason for rejecting candidature of the petitioners only because they appended their signatures in capital letters in the application form. Making signature is a trait which one can develop even in capital letters. It is not uncommon with youths from rural background having only formal education to make their signature in capital letters. In fact, there is no inhibition in law for putting signatures in capital letters. This by itself cannot be considered as a disqualification for appointment, particularly when the petitioners have been otherwise found suitable in all other respects. Action of the respondents in depriving the petitioners from appearing in the medical examination on the said premise is arbitrary and illegal. 5. In the result, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned condition, being violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, is therefore declared unconstitutional. Respondents are directed to permit the petitioners to appear in the medical examination/test and consider their candidature as per their merit in accordance with law. 6. With that direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. This also disposes of stay applications. 7. Since this disposes of bunch of writ petitions, registry is directed to place a copy of this judgment in every file of the bunch.Writ petition allowed. *******