- (1.) ISSUE notice to show cause as to why this petition for writ be not admitted.
(2.) MR. Mahendra Choudhary, learned standing counsel for the respondents accepts the notice. The writ petition is heard finally looking to the narrow amplitude of the controversy involved in this petition for writ. The factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that the petitioner submitted an on-line application form to appear in "Teacher Grade 3rd Direct Recruitment Competitive Examination, 2012" on 2.4.2012 at 11:54 a.m. In the application form aforesaid, she declared her category as "Backward class" having a female gender. Due to some inadvertence, she failed to mention her other special category that is of "Outstanding Sportsman". On the same day at 12:33 p.m., the petitioner filled-up a separate application form wherein she quite specifically mentioned her other category as "Outstanding Sportsman". Despite filing fresh application form, the respondents issued an admission card treating her only under "Backward class". While availing the test, the petitioner in OMR sheet referred herself as a woman from "Backward class" and an "Outstanding Sportsman". The result of the test was declared by the respondents on 30.8.2012. As per the statement of result (Annex.8), the claim of the petitioner was considered by the respondents in the category of "Backward class (woman)" only ignoring the consideration in the category of "Extra-ordinary Sportsman". The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a error took place while submitting application at first instance on 2.4.2012 at 11:54 a.m. But the same was rectified only after 39 minutes on 2.4.2012 itself, as such, the respondents should have considered case of the petitioner in the category of "Backward class (woman)" with special category of "Extra- ordinary Sportsman". From perusal of the documents Annex.-5 and Annex.-6, it is apparent that the petitioner with quite diligence rectified the error committed by her. While availing examination also she mentioned her special category as an "Extra-ordinary Sportsman" in OMR sheets. The respondents, therefore, should have condoned the error and should have considered her candidature in the category of "Backward class (woman)" with the special category of "Outstanding Sportsman". The respondents while making recruitment may avail assistance of technology but at the same time a human approach is also require to be kept in mind. The object of holding competitive test is to have best available hand and in this process merit should not be compromised just for the reason that the mechanical procedure adopted do not support the manual exercise. In the cases, if the human error is rectified with all diligence at earliest possible, a condonation of error is desirable. The total ignorance of such rectification results into hardship and arbitrariness only. The non-consideration of the petitioner under her special category despite necessary correction at the earliest is highly unjust and arbitrary, as such is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Having considered all the facts of the case and for the reasons given above, I deem it appropriate to accept this petition for writ. Accordingly, the same is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider candidature of the petitioner for the purpose of appointment as Teacher Grade-III by treating her a candidate belonging to "Backward class (woman)" with the special category of 'Extra-ordinary Sportsman".;