Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mounesh vs Union Of India And Ors on 3 July, 2023

Author: Suraj Govindaraj

Bench: Suraj Govindaraj

                                                   -1-
                                                           NC: 2023:KHC-K:4814
                                                              WP No. 201521 of 2023




                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                         KALABURAGI BENCH

                                DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2023

                                                  BEFORE
                             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ


                             WRIT PETITION NO. 201521 OF 2023 (S-RES)
                      BETWEEN:

                      MOUNESH S/O TIPPANNA,
                      AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
                      R/O #25 NEAR SHREE DURGADEVI TEMPLE,
                      BHUPUR TANDA, KALLI LINGASUGUR POST
                      TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR-584122
                                                                        ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. PRASHANT B.WAJANTRI, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.   UNION OF INDIA
                           THE SECRETARY TO
                           GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
                           DEPARTMENT OF POST,
Digitally signed by        NEW DELHI-110011
B NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF              2.   ASST. DIRECTOR GENERAL
KARNATAKA                  DEPARTMENT OF POST, DAK BHAWAN,
                           NEW DELHI-110001

                      3.   SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES
                           RAICHUR DIVISION
                           RAICHUR-584101
                                                                      ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI)

                            THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
                      OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
                      ENDORSEMENT IN SO FOR AS REASONS MENTION AT SERIAL NO.2
                      AND 3 IMPUGNED ANNEXURE-H DATED 20.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE
                      3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND ETC.
                                 -2-
                                       NC: 2023:KHC-K:4814
                                          WP No. 201521 of 2023




      THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

1. Sri.Sudhirsingh R.Vijapur, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India accepts notice for the respondents.

2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ quashing the endorsement in so for as reasons mention at Serial No.2 and 3 impugned Annexure-H dated 20.03.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent vide Annexure-

H in the interest of justice and equity.

b) Issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent accept the SCC certificate and appoint the petitioner to the post of Dak Sevak Post Engagements at Raichur Division by considering his application vide Annexure-E.

c) Pass such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case and allow this writ petition, in the interest of justice."

3. The petitioner had passed Secondary Examination (Tenth Standard) at Sarvodaya Correspondence College, Lingausgur and thereafter, applied for the post of Gramin Dak Sevak advertised by the Director General, Department of Posts. The application of the -3- NC: 2023:KHC-K:4814 WP No. 201521 of 2023 petitioner came to be rejected on account of the selected board name by the petitioner not tallying with the uploaded certificate board name. The contention of the petitioner is that by inadvertence and by mistake, the petitioner had uploaded the board name as 'Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board' when in fact it should have been 'Board of Higher Secondary Education Karnataka' in terms of Annexure-A. This he submits is a typographical error which ought to have been rectified and in this regard, he relies upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.24847/2022 dated 31.01.2023 wherein this Court had permitted the applicant therein to upload the Schedule Caste Certificate which had not been so uploaded due to an human error.

4. Sri Sudhirsingh R. Vijapur, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents submits that the wrong uploading would disentitle -4- NC: 2023:KHC-K:4814 WP No. 201521 of 2023 the applicant from being considered. In this regard, he relies upon the clause-8(ix) of the Notification at Annexure-D to contend that whenever an incomplete data or wrong document and information is uploaded or even unnecessary documents are uploaded, the candidature will be rejected. In the present case, the wrong data being uploaded, the application of the petitioner is liable to be rejected.

5. Heard Sri Prashant B.Wajantri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sudhirsingh R. Vijapur, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondents. Perused the papers.

6. In the present case, it is not the question of incomplete data inasmuch as, all data has been uploaded. It is also not a case of wrong document, since the correct document has been uploaded. At the most reference to the document could be said to be wrong which in my considered opinion, cannot disentitle the applicant from being considered more -5- NC: 2023:KHC-K:4814 WP No. 201521 of 2023 so, when the petitioner himself has brought it to the notice of the respondents about the said wrongful entry made in the application and sought for the same to be corrected. The mistake committed by the petitioner is that the board name has been uploaded as the 'Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board' instead of 'Board of Higher Secondary Education Karnataka'. This seems to be a typographical error committed by the petitioner and as such, correction of the same ought to have been accepted by the respondents. It is needless to say that verification of the documents is a complete different aspect, the respondents would be liberty to verify the authenticity or otherwise of the said documents and thereafter, process the application of the petitioner on the basis of the name of board being shown as 'Board of Higher Secondary Education Karnataka'.

7. As such, I pass the following:

-6-

NC: 2023:KHC-K:4814 WP No. 201521 of 2023 ORDER i. The Writ Petition is allowed in part.

            ii.    A certiorari is issued, rejection of the
                   application      of        the     petitioner     vide
                   endorsement           dated        20.03.2023       at
                   Annexure-H is hereby quashed.


            iii.   A     mandamus        is    issued    directing   the
respondents to consider the application of the petitioner as showing the board as that of 'Board of Higher Secondary Education Karnataka'. The respondents shall follow all due verification process as prescribed under the notification and thereafter, consider the application of the petitioner.
Sd/-
JUDGE NB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35