VIPIN SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sharad Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.1, 2, 3 and 5 and Sri Shivam Sharma, learned counsel for the opposite party no.4.

(2.) By means of the writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dtd. 19/6/2021 passed by opposite party no.4 by means of which the petitioner's appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher in 69,000 Primary Teacher has been cancelled. The petitioner has also assailed the decision dtd. 19/6/2021 passed by opposite party no.5 by means of which the District Selection Committee has taken decision of cancelling the appointment of the petitioner.

(3.) The precise submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that while filling up the application form, he indicated his marks for Intermediate education passed in the year 2009 as 352 out of 500 in place of 332 out of 500 marks. As soon as the petitioner came to know about such bonafide mistake, he has requested the authority concerned to permit the petitioner to make such correction saying that he may provide original certificate/marksheet of the interim examination.