The main legal point established in the judgment is that a candidate cannot be allowed to change their category in a competitive examination at a belated stage, especially when they have participated in the examination and known the category they applied for.

JUDGMENT

1. In pursuance of the notification dated 05.01.2021 for competitive examination for direct recruitment to the cadre of District Judge, 2020 under the Rajasthan Judicial Services Rules, 2010, the petitioner applied online application form in the General category. He appeared in the preliminary examination and secured 92 marks, whereas the cut off marks remained 96. He obtained required certificate of OBC Non-Creamy Layer (afterwards referred to as "OBC (NCL)") category on 02.03.2021 after last date i.e. 27.02.2021 for submitting online application form. However, the date was extended by another notification upto 31.03.2021. As per averment made in the writ petition, after issuing notification for extension of date, the petitioner was not provided opportunity to re-submit the online application form in the revised category. In the absence of any instruction regarding re-submission of the online application form the petitioner was deprived to get benefit of reservation of OBC (NCL) category. As per averment made in the writ petition, the petitioner submitted his online application form through E-mitra. The online application form of the petitioner was submitted under the General Category by the Computer Operator instead of submission under OBC (NCL) category in bonafide manner. The applicants like petitioner without instructions of the respondent authority could not submit their another application form during the extended period. If the respondents would have given such opportunity to re-submit new application form or edit their previous application form on getting due certificate of OBC (NCL) after first cut off date, then justice may be made towards aspirants like petitioner. As per the prayer made in the writ petition, the petitioner be declared qualified for main examination under the OBC (NCL) category and be allowed to participate in further selection process.

2. In response to the writ petition, the respondents filed reply. As per reply the petitioner never approached help line of the respondents for change of category. The category of the petitioner was also mentioned in the admit card. The petitioner did not make any endeavour to get the same corrected. The petitioner did not make any request for change of any category prior to declaration of the result, whereas the result of preliminary examination had already been declared on 16.09.2021.

3. During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner while relying on the judgment of this Court in Kavita Choudhary v. The Registrar (Examination), RHC, Jodhpur & Anr.: D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1700/2017 submits that bona fide mistakes should be allowed to be corrected at latter stage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner belongs to OBC (NCL) category and on account of his bona fide mistake he applied in the General category. He submits that no opportunity was given by the respondents to correct the human error in recruitment process though last date for submitting the online form was extended. He further submits that the petitioner also obtained certificate in the respective category from the competent authority before extended cut off date for filing the online application form. He also submits that if the petitioner is allowed to appear in the main examination, as he obtained more marks than the cut off marks in the OBC (NCL) category, no prejudice would cause to anybody.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents while relying on the judgment of this Court in Sunil Bhanwariya v. Registrar, Examination Cell, RHC, Jodhpur & Anr. submits that the petitioner having participated in the preliminary examination in the General category cannot raise this issue at belated stage after declaration of the result for the post of District Judge.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7. As per admitted factual position of the present case, in pursuance of 85 vacancies advertise