Allahabad High Court
Dilip Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 19 June, 2020
Author: Anjani Kumar Mishra
Bench: Anjani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4318 of 2020 Petitioner :- Dilip Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avneesh Tripathi,Shikhar Tandon Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhanu Pratap Singh Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
This writ petition relate to the selection process under way for filling 69000 posts of Assistant Teachers in Primary and Junior High Schools in the State of UP which operate under the Board of Basic Eduction, UP., Allahabad.
I have heard Shri Avneesh Tripathi, counsel appearing for the petitioner and counsel for the respondent no.2 as also learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
In the writ petition, it is alleged that petitioner did not fill in the correct marks obtained by him in the High School Exams, while filling in the online form. He has obtained 377 marks in the said exam but it has been filled in as 37 marks only. This is a human error. Petitioner does not stand to gain by filing lower that actual marks in the online form. A prayer has been made that the respondents be directed to permit the petitioner to correct his on-line forms.
In writ petition, it has been categorically stated in paragraph 17 that the petitioner has qualified in the written exams. While filling up the reminder of his form on-line, he noticed the mistake made while filling up the marks in the qualifying examinations.
Counsel appearing for the petitioner has cited various case law, namely, the order dated 04.06.2020 passed in Writ A No. 4088 of 2020 wherein the petitioner had filled the wrong roll number of her graduation examination. This error was found to be a human error and since the petitioner had qualified in the written examination and was required to face an interview before the Selection Committee, it was left open to the Selection Committee to examine and pass appropriate order on the pleas for correction of the roll number in the application form. This consideration was directed to be made at the time of counselling.
Another judgment relied upon is by the Single Judge of this Court in a Writ A No. 18471 of 2018 and connected matters, wherein, it has been held that the candidates should be afforded an opportunity of correcting human errors mistakes made while filling up on-line forms. However this judgement does not mention specifically as to what was the errors or mistakes which were permitted to be corrected.
The next judgment relied upon is by a Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Staff Selection Commission vs. Sarla and Others. This judgement dismissed a letters patent appeal and affirmed the judgment passed by the Single Judge. The Single Judge had held that if an incorrect entry is made due to a human error and since there exists no provision on the website for correction in the on-line application form, such a mistake is noticed subsequently, the candidates should not be made to suffer for the same.
The last judgment cited has been rendered in Writ Petition No. 4070 of 2020 decided on 30.05.2020. This is an exhaustive judgment and considers a large number of decisions including decisions by Division Benches. The Court has dealt with various mistakes that had been made by the petitioners in the petition aforesaid, and goes on to hold that errors committed by the candidates which cannot be said to be human errors cannot be condoned and their correction is not permissible.
I have considered the submission made by counsel for the petitioner and perused the records as also judgments cited.
In this case, the petitioner is stated to have qualified on the basis of the written examination. He has made a mistake while filling up the marks obtained in the High School examinations. The petitioner in this petition, in my opinion would be governed by the order passed in Writ Petition No. 4088 of 2020 which reads as follows:-
"From perusal of the same, it is clear that after the petitioner was found selected, she has to face the aforesaid Selection Committee. I am of the opinion that for the mistake, which was committed by the petitioner, she should place the aforesaid facts before the aforesaid Selection Committee at the time of councelling. If petitioner will place the aforesaid facts before the Selection Committee constituted under Rule 16 of the Rules 1981, the Selection Committee will look into the same sympathetically and pass appropriate orders for the correction of roll number in the application form of the petitioner."
This petition, therefore, is liable to be disposed of on the same reasoning as extracted above.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the observation that the petitioner may place the relevant facts before the Selection Committee at the time of interview /counselling and the Selection Committee will look into the same and pass appropriate orders as regards the correction prayed for by the petitioner.
Order Date :- 19.6.2020 RKM