Hon’ble B. Amit Sthalekar, J.—This special appeal has been filed by the appellant-petitioner challenging the order dated 2.11.2011 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge, by which his writ petition seeking quashing of the order dated 18.5.2011 whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected for being sent for Special BTC Training 2008, and a direction commanding the respondent No. 5, the Principal, District Institute of Education Training (DIET), District Sitapur to permit the petitioner to undergo training in the Special B.T.C. Training-2008 has been dismissed.

2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 58479 of 2011 challenging the order dated 18.5.2011 passed by the Principal, DIET, District Sitapur rejecting the representation of the petitioner for being sent for training in the Special B.T.C. -2008. From the facts, as narrated in the writ petition, it appears that another writ petition had been filed earlier by the petitioner being writ petition No. 32986 of 2010, Km. Archana Rastogi v. State of U.P. and others, seeking a direction to the respondents to admit the petitioner in B.T.C. (Special) and (General) Training- 2008. The contention of the petitioner at that time was that the petitioner was not being considered for being sent for the Special B.T.C. Training Course on the ground that her degree of B.P.Ed. was from a university situate outside of the State of U.P.. The said writ petition was disposed of by an Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court by order dated 7.7.2010 and a direction was issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner on merit and if she comes within the zone of consideration amongst other candidates on merit, she should be sent for training. When no order was passed by the respondents in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 7.7.2010 the petitioner was constrained to file Civil Misc. Contempt Application No. 1508 of 2011 and this Court vide order dated 18.3.2011 took cognizance of the said contempt and issued notice to the Dr. Rajkumari Verma, Principal, DIET, District Sitapur. As a result of the said notice issued in the contempt petition, the order dated 18.5.2011 impugned in the writ petition giving rise to the present Special Appeal has been passed.

3. When the matter came up before the Hon’ble Single Judge it was submitted by the appellant-petitioner that in her Application Form in the Special B.T.C. Training-2008 she had wrongly indicated her marks of High School as 256 instead of 356 as a result of which the total merit index marks came to 227.73, which was less than the marks secured by the last selected candidate. On the consideration of these facts the said writ petition was dismissed by the Hon’ble Single Judge on 2.11.2011 by observing that it was for the petitioner to have immediately made a representation for correction of her marks in the Application Form and in view of the matter since the duration of Special B.T.C. Training-2008 is only six months and the said period being over, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed. Aggrieved by the order dated 2.11.2011 the present Special appeal has been filed.

4. We have heard Sri K.C. Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner and Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due to sheer human error while filling her Application Form for the Special B.T.C. Training-2008, the appellant-petitioner mentioned the marks obtained by her in High School as 256 instead of 356 whereas actually she had secured 356 marks in her High School Examination and if her merit had been considered on the basis of the said actual marks obtained, her merit in the total merit index would have been 244.40 whereas the merit of the last selected woman candidate was 231.59 and, therefore, in that eventuality the petitioner would have fallen within the zone of consider