IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.
Jubeda Bano – Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education & Ors. – Respondents
Service Single No. 17495 of 2021
Decided On : 16-08-2021
Constitution Of india,1950 – Rejection of candidature - Petitioner is that respondent has not applied its mind and in total disregard of direction issued by this Court has proceeded to pass impugned order- Petitioner has passed his high school examination from CBSE- Board- In mark sheet only grade is provided and specified percentage of marks grade-wise- By multiplying total marks of subject he filled up marks obtained in high school in application form which has not been taken into consideration while passing impugned order –
Finding of the Court:
Court not find any good ground to provide some more time to learned counsel for opposite parties to seek further instructions and court decide this writ petition finally at admission stage quashing impugned order passed by Secretary Basic Education Board which is contained as Annexure writ petition direction is issued to Secretary Basic Education Board to consider petitioner's candidature for appointment on post of Assistant Teacher in Primary School run by UP- Basic Education Board by passing such order within a period of three weeks from date of presentation of a certified/ computerized copy of this order –
Result: Petition allowed
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Piyush Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for opposite party Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party No.5.
2. On the first date of admission, this Court has passed the order dated 12.08.2021 as under :-
In compliance of the judgment and order passed by this Court vide order dated 14.12.2020 in Writ Petition No.11079 (S/S) of 2020, the respondent has passed the impugned order dated 14.7.2021, rejecting the claim of the petitioner.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent has not applied its mind and in total disregard of the direction issued by this Court, has proceeded to pass the impugned order. Next submission is that the petitioner has passed his high school examination from the C.B.S.E. Board. In the mark sheet, only grade is provided and specified the percentage of marks grade-wise. By multiplying the total marks of the subject, he filled up the marks obtained in the high school in the application form, which has not been taken into consideration while passing the impugned order.
On the other hand, Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.2 requested for the grant of one day time to seek instruction in the matter and assured this Court that in case the petitioner is found eligible and qualified as per the appendix framed under the 1981 Rules, his claim shall be given consideration.
Accordingly, put up this matter as fresh on 16.8.2021."
3. Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, has submitted that however he has not received complete instructions in the matter but on the basis of telephonic instructions he has been apprised that the case of the petitioner has been considered in terms of the Government Order dated 05.03.2021 and pointing out that the application form of the petitioner has not been filled up as per the documents relating to her examination, her candidature has been rejected.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No.12 of the writ petition, which is a final order dated 09.02.2021 passed by this Court in the case of the petitioner bearing Writ Petition No.3723 (S/S) of 2021; Jubeda Bano vs. State of U.P. & others whereby the petitioner has raised her bonafide grievance before the Court by submitting that for the recruitment on the post of Assistant Teacher by holding written examination in the year 2019 she applied for and got successful in the written examination. In the application form, due to inadvertence mistake she filled up the column of percentage of marks despite the requirement of total marks obtained out of the marks of the subjects.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted before the Court in that writ petition that in the case of marks shown in the percentage is calculated as per requirement of the department, it will be the same as 89.3%. Therefore, while disposing of the said writ petition finally giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Secretary, Basic Education Board, Prayagraj taking shelter of the Government Order dated 04.12.2020 and appropriate decision was to be taken in terms of the Government Order dated 04.12.2020.
6. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 09.02.2021, the petitioner preferred a representation to the Competent Authority but the said representation was rejected by passing the impugned order dated 14.07.2021 in the light of the Government Order dated 05.03.2021 instead of in the light of the Government Order dated 04.12.2020.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has enclosed the Government Order dated 04.12.2020 as Annexure No.8 to the writ petition and has referred clause-13 whereof, which clearly indica
Point of law: If any candidate discloses/ declares his/ her details erroneously without having relevant documents supporting the same, his/ her candidature shall be cancelled
The candidature of a candidate is liable to be cancelled only if the candidate puts himself/herself in an advantaged position by committing a mistake while submitting the online application form.
Candidates who fill incorrect marks that disadvantage them should not have their candidature cancelled, while those who gain an advantage through errors may face disqualification.
Candidates should not be penalized for minor discrepancies in reported marks if such discrepancies do not affect the overall merit list, as per the provisions of the relevant government orders.
on a reading of the Government Order and Circulars applicable it is quite clear that wherever a candidate had put himself in a disadvantageous position as stated above his candidature shall not be ca....
Appellant has failed to make out a case for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to rectify the mistake made by her in her online submission
Fraudulent documentation undermines claims for educational qualifications, disallowing entitlement effects from misrepresentation; courts emphasize integrity in certification processes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.