The court held that minor errors in bubbling Roll Numbers on OMR sheets should not result in disqualification if candidates are identifiable, emphasizing fairness in evaluation over strict adherence to procedural errors.

JUDGMENT :

NAVIN CHAWLA, J.

1. These petitions have been filed by the petitioners, challenging the Order dated 05.08.2024 passed in O.A. No. 2517/2022, titled Niharika Puhan v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Ors. (in W.P. (C) 17595/2024), and the Order dated 06.12.2024 passed in O.A. No. 1832/2023, titled Kusum Gupta v. Chairman Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board & Ors. (in W.P. (C) 1282/2025), by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal').

2. By the Impugned Order dated 05.08.2024 passed in O.A. No. 2517/2022, the O.A. filed by the respondent herein was allowed by the learned Tribunal, directing the petitioners to process the OMR answer sheet of the respondent for evaluation and, if found to meet the merit list and otherwise eligible, to grant consequential relief by issuing an offer of appointment.

3. In contrast, by the Order dated 06.12.2024 passed in O.A.No.1832/2023, the O.A. filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed.

4. In both these petitions, the question that arises for consideration before this Court is the effect of the candidate/respondent in W.P. (C) 17595/2024 and the petitioner in W.P. (C) 1282/2025, having marked/bubbled their Roll Numbers with an incorrect digit, while at the same time correctly mentioning their Roll Numbers in numerical form on the OMR sheet. It is for this reason that both these petitions are being considered by this common judgment.

5. To begin with, we shall first note the facts from which these two petitions arise.

FACTS OF THE W.P.(C) 17595/2024: -

6. The petitioners had issued an advertisement in 2017, inter alia, inviting applications for the post of Physical Education Teachers (PostCode 90/17). The respondent applied for the said post and participated in the Tier-I Selection Process, that is, the written examination.

7. By a Notice No. F.No. 187/PET/DSSB/Int.Cell/2019- 2020/2840-45 dated 04.06.2019, the respondent was declared disqualified in the examination. The notice, inter alia, states as under:

“ 1. Whereas it is stated that all candidates who appeared in the examination held on 16/09/2018 for the post of Physical Education Teacher under Post Code-90/17 in Directorate of Education were given clear instructions on Question Booklet as well as on OMR answer sheet including the following directions:

a) The candidate must complete the details of Roll Number, Question Booklet No., etc., on the Answer-sheet and Answer- sheet No. on the space provided above in this Question Booklet, I before he/she actually start answering the questions, failing which Answer-sheet will not be evaluated and he/she will be awarded ‘Zero’ mark.

b) A machine will read the coded information in the OMR Answer sheet. In case the information is incomplete/ different from the information given in the application form, the candidature of such candidates will be treated as cancelled.

c) Valuation of answer sheet will be done on the computer. Candidate should not take any stray marks on the Answer Sheet, tamper with or mutilate it. Otherwise it will not be evaluated.

d) The appropriate circle should be shaded for Roll No., Question Booklet No. and Preference of Post Codes applied for etc. This should be done carefully because only the shaded circle is scanned.

2. It is further informed that the Board has been following the automated system of reading Roll No. etc. on OMR answer sheet through scanner without any manual intervention. Further, the automated system/scanner did not identify the Roll No. on OMR answer sheet in respect of One Hundred Sixty Eight (168) candidates who appeared in