JUDGMENT Satyen Vaidya, J. - Petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking following substantive reliefs: - "(i) To quash and set-aside Annexure P-VI i.e. notice for information dated 01.06.2021 qua petitioner whereby the recommendation of the petitioner has been kept on hold by the commission. (ii) To direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner for the post of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II (post code 776) in the facts and circumstances of the case. (iii) To direct the respondents to keep Annexure PVII dated 18.06.2021 in abeyance till the final outcome of present Civil Writ Petition and further not to give appointment to any candidate as per Annexure P-VII." CASE OF PETITIONER: 2. The facts as alleged in the petition are that respondent No.1 issued Advertisement No.36-1/2020 on 02.03.2020, for selection to different categories of posts. One of such post being of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II in the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Himachal Pradesh. Total 154 numbers of posts in this category were advertised, out of which, 56 posts were for General (UR) Category. Minimum qualification prescribed for the said post was as under: - "i) 10+2 in Science from a recognized Board of School Education. ii. B.Sc. Medical Laboratory Technology/B.Sc. Medical Technology Laboratory/ B.Sc. Medical Technology (Laboratory)/B.Sc. Medial Laboratory Sciences/B.Sc. in Medical Laboratory Technology (Lateral) from a recognized University or an Institute affiliated to a recognized University. iii) Should be registered with the Himachal Pradesh Para Medical Council for the above qualification." 3. As per petitioner, she was having all the qualifications for the post of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II. Petitioner had passed her 10+2 examination in 2014. She had also passed B.Sc. in Medical Technology from Himachal Pradesh University in November, 2018. Petitioner further claimed to have registered herself with H.P. Para Medical Council ("Council" for brevity) on 21.01.2019. 4. In response to above noted advertisement, petitioner applied for the post of Medical Laboratory Technician Grade-II within stipulated time period. Extended last date for submission of the application was dated 05.06.2020. Petitioner appeared in the written examination conducted on dated 29.11.2020 under Roll No.776001263. She scored 44.50 marks in the written examination. On 04.03.2021, petitioner received communication from respondent No.1 informing her that she had found place in the list of short-listed candidates for undertaking the evaluation process to be held on 15.03.2021. Petitioner was required to bring original documents with attested copies. 5. She scored 44.50 marks in the written examination. On 04.03.2021, petitioner received communication from respondent No.1 informing her that she had found place in the list of short-listed candidates for undertaking the evaluation process to be held on 15.03.2021. Petitioner was required to bring original documents with attested copies. 5. Before the date of evaluation, petitioner approached respondent No.2 for registration certificate. On 08.03.2021, respondent No.2 again issued provisional registration certificate in favour of the petitioner. 6. Petitioner appeared with all requisite certificates alongwith registration certificate issued by respondent No.3 on the date of evaluation and submitted all the documents. 7. On dated 20.05.2021, respondent No.1 declared a list of 86 successful candidates, however, the name of petitioner was not included therein. Since certain representations were received by respondent No.1 raising issues of registration with respondent No.1, result was kept on hold and was finally published on 18.6.2021. Total 91 candidates were declared successful. Petitioner did not find her name in the list of successful candidates and after enquiry she found that her candidature was rejected on the ground that she did not possess valid registration certificate from respondent No.3 prior to dated 05.06.2020. CASE OF RESPONDENTS: 8. Respondent No.1 in its reply has submitted that the candidature of petitioner was rightly rejected as condition of the advertisement was not fulfilled by her. As per advertisement, eligibility of the candidates was to be seen on the closing date fixed for receipt of online application i.e.05.06.2020. It was categorically prescribed that the candidates must ensure their eligibility in respect of category, experience, age, and essential qualification etc. as mentioned against each post in the advertisement to avoid rejection at the later stage. Respondent No.1 further mentioned that since the petitioner did not possess valid registration certificate of date prior to 05.06.2020, therefore, her candidature was liable to be rejected. 9. Respondent No.2 filed its formal reply. No reply was filed by respondent No.3. 10. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully. ANALYSIS 11. Before adverting to the discussion on the contentious issue involved in the case, we deem it proper to notice relevant terms of the advertisement dated 02.03.2020, which are, as under: - "5. IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING UP ONLINE APPLICATIONS: 1 to 3. Xxx xxx xxx 4. ANALYSIS 11. Before adverting to the discussion on the contentious issue involved in the case, we deem it proper to notice relevant terms of the advertisement dated 02.03.2020, which are, as under: - "5. IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING UP ONLINE APPLICATIONS: 1 to 3. Xxx xxx xxx 4. The candidates must ensure their eligibility in respect of category, experience, age and essential qualification(s), etc., as mentioned against each post in the advertisement to avoid rejection at later stage. 5. & 6. Xxx xxx xxx 7. The candidate should possess requisite essential qualification(s) prescribed for the post(s) for which he/she wants to apply as on closing date fixed for submission of Online Recruitment Applications (ORA). 11. SUBMISSION OF CERTIFICATES/ DOCUMENTS. The download/printed copy of the Online Application Form alongwith necessary original certificates and self attested photocopies will have to be produced at the time of evaluation. No offline Application Form will be accepted by the office. 13. ELIGBILITY CONDITIONS: - i. The date of determining the eligibility of all candidates in terms of Essential Qualifications, experience etc., shall be reckoned as on closing date for submitting the Online Recruitment Applications (ORA). ii. xxx xxx xxx (iii) Onus of proving that a candidate has acquired requisite degree/essential qualifications by the stipulated date is on the candidate and in the absence of proof the date as mentioned on the face of certificate/degree or the date of issue of certificate/degree shall be taken as date of acquiring essential qualification." 12. As per petitioner she had submitted provisional registration certificate dated 21.1.2019 issued by respondent No.3 (Annexure P-1). This being so, question that arises for determination is whether the submission of aforesaid document on the date of evaluation was sufficient compliance with the terms of advertisement? 13. Perusal of the provisional certificate dated 21.1.2019 Annexure P-1, reveals that this document was issued by respondent No.3showing its validity to be one year. 14. Respondent No.3 has not denied the genuineness and authenticity of provisional registration certificate, Annexure P-1, issued in favour of petitioner. However, respondent No.1, during selection process, in pursuance to advertisement No. 36-1/2020 dated 2.3.2020, has not considered document Annexure P-1 on the ground that it was valid only for one year. 15. As per, Section 38 of the H.P. Para Medical Council Act ("Act" for brevity), a person once registered by the Council has to renew his/her registration after three years. 15. As per, Section 38 of the H.P. Para Medical Council Act ("Act" for brevity), a person once registered by the Council has to renew his/her registration after three years. Respondents have not brought any material on record to justify the exclusion of Annexure P-1 while considering the candidature of petitioner. It has not come forth as to under which provision of the Act or Rules/ Regulations framed there under, the certificate of registration was issued on provisional basis that too only for a period of one year. It is also not the case of respondents that petitioner was not qualified to be registered under the Act. CONCLUSION 16. From the above discussion, we have no hesitation to conclude that though respondent No.3 had provisionally registered petitioner on 21.01.2019 and had issued Annexure P-1 valid only for one year, but in absence of any legal backing the validity of Annexure P-1 as on 6.5.2020 could not have been questioned. It is worth noticing that respondent No.3 had issued yet another provisional certificate in favour of petitioner on 8.3.2021 i.e., before the date of evaluation/counselling on 15.3.2021. 17. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, the issue with respect to registration of petitioner with respondent No.3 before the last date of submission of online applications, remained more of form than substance. 18. While dealing with substantive rights of parties courts cannot remain oblivious towards its duties to impart substantial justice. What material is that candidate should have qualified basic eligibility criteria and then should have been prevented from obtaining the registration in the form of requisite certificate etc. for one or the other bonafide reason. Merely because the form of particular transaction was not proper cannot be used to deny the person rights otherwise emanating from such deal. 19. In light of above discussion, it is held that petitioner had made substantial compliance with the requirements of advertisement. She was qualified as B.Sc. Medical Technology (Laboratory) and was also registered with respondent No.3 i.e. Himachal Pradesh Para Medical Council w.e.f. 21.1.2019. In view of this matter, the stand of respondent No.1 that petitioner did not hold requisite qualification before 06.05.2020 i.e., the last date for submission of online application is not justified. 20. She was qualified as B.Sc. Medical Technology (Laboratory) and was also registered with respondent No.3 i.e. Himachal Pradesh Para Medical Council w.e.f. 21.1.2019. In view of this matter, the stand of respondent No.1 that petitioner did not hold requisite qualification before 06.05.2020 i.e., the last date for submission of online application is not justified. 20. The rejection of the candidature of petitioner by respondent No.1, thus, is clearly illegal, arbitrary, irrational and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India. Respondent No.1 is directed to consider and recommend the name of petitioner for the post of Medical Technician Laboratory, Grade-II advertised vide advertisement No. 36-1/2020 dated 02.03.2020 in case she figures in merit of the General (UR) Category within a period of two weeks from the date of this judgment. The petition is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.