NEW DELHI: Can a medical certificate help a woman get a job if her school records show she was under 18? The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh high court has said no, if official school records are available to determine her age. It dismissed her plea against the cancellation of her provisional selection for a school helper’s post.In an October 9, 2026, order, the high court held that the authorities were right to cancel her selection. Her school records showed that she did not meet the minimum age requirement.Why was the woman’s selection cancelled?According to the judgment, the woman applied for an helper post at primary school in response to an advertisement issued on January 18, 2023. She figured at serial number 12 in the tentative selection list.However, a corrigendum issued on February 17, 2023, cancelled her provisional selection and showed another candidate as selected for the post.The woman challenged the decision, arguing that her selection had been cancelled on the incorrect assumption that she was under 18 on January 1, 2023. She relied on an age determination certificate issued by the chairman of a medical board, which declared her to be 23 years old.She also argued that her annual income did not exceed Rs 50,400, while the other candidate’s annual income was Rs 74,000. Since the selection guidelines gave priority to candidates with lower annual income, she claimed she should have been preferred.The authorities, however, said her eighth-standard qualification certificate recorded her date of birth as March 4, 2005. Under the applicable guidelines, candidates had to be at least 18 years old on January 1, 2023. The authorities calculated that she was 17 years, nine months and 28 days old on that date and was therefore ineligible.Which record should determine a candidate’s age?Justice Rajnesh Oswal found that the woman’s school records did not support the date of birth she had entered in her application form. The judgment noted that her application mentioned May 15, 2003, but her provisional-cum-discharge certificate issued by the headmaster recorded March 4, 2005.Rejecting her reliance on the medical board certificate, the high court observed:“It is a settled position of law that where a school discharge certificate based on official academic records is available, a medical opinion cannot be relied upon to determine a candidate’s age.”The court also noted that the woman’s stated date of birth in the application form was not supported by any educational or required qualification certificate.“It is pertinent to note that in her application form, the petitioner recorded her date of birth as 15.05.2003; however, this assertion remained wholly uncorroborated by any educational or requisite qualification certificate,” the court said.The court held that the authorities had acted within their powers in cancelling her provisional selection through the corrigendum dated February 17, 2023. It found no legal or factual infirmity in their decision.“Consequently, the official respondents acted well within their authority in issuing the corrigendum dated 17.02.2023, and the same suffers from no legal or factual infirmity,” the high court noted.Justice Oswal dismissed the woman’s petition, finding no merit in her challenge to the cancellation of her provisional selection.“In view of the above, this writ petition is found to be without any merit and the same is dismissed accordingly,” it concluded.The judgment leaves the cancellation of the woman’s provisional selection in place. The other candidate’s selection for the school helper’s post therefore remains undisturbed by the court’s ruling.