As per case facts, the petitioners, originally from Rajasthan, applied for Constable (GD) posts in CAPFs/NIA/SSF/Assam Rifles, opting for reserved categories from other states. Despite securing sufficient marks and undergoing ... initial training, their candidatures were rejected during document verification because they produced Domicile/Caste Certificates from Rajasthan, not from their claimed "migrated states" as required by the advertisement. They sought to quash their rejection and be allowed to continue training. The question arose whether candidates applying from a "state of migration" for reservation benefits, without producing domicile certificates from that state, could be appointed. Finally, the Court ruled that candidates must provide valid domicile certificates from their claimed state of migration or origin. Failing this, their candidatures are rightly cancelled. The Court dismissed the petitions, stating that provisional appointment letters create no vested right without fulfilling eligibility and that claims of discrimination based on others' illegal appointments are unfounded. Respondents were directed to inquire into such allegations.