JUDGMENT : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Date not pleaded, but in the month of September and in the year 2013, the respondents invited applications from eligible candidates to be appointed PTI Grade-III. The petitioner applied as a General category female candidate. Written examination was conducted on 21.2.2015. 2. Before the results were declared, she made a representation on 20.3.2015 informing that having been divorced on 24.11.2014, she be treated as a woman candidate in the divorcee quota. 3. When the result was declared the petitioner found that last woman candidate in the general category in the panel had secured more marks than her but in the divorcee category, last employed candidate has got less marks. She filed a writ petition in this Court seeking a direction that the respondent should treat her to be a woman category in the divorce quota. 4. The learned Single Judge has held on facts that the petitioner failed to prove that she had given a information to RPSC for change of category. Second reason given is that eligibility as per the advertisement has to be considered with reference to the last date of submitting the application. 5. We concurred with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. The last date for the application to be submitted is the date by which eligibility has to be acquired is well settled in the decisions reported as 1995 Supp (1) SCC 188 (Gurdeep Singh v. State of J & K), (2013) 11 SCC 58 Rakesh Kumar Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi) and (1994) 2 SCC 723 U.P. Public Service Commission, U.P. v. Alpana. 6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. 7. No cost. Writ petition dismissed.