JUDGMENT :

Saral Srivastava, J.

1. Heard Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1 & 2, and Sri Arun Kumar learned counsel for respondent no.3.

2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has prayed for the following relief:-

"(a). a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to forthwith grant appointment to the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher in a Junior Basic School in pursuance to his selection in Assistant Teacher Recruitment Examination-2019, within a period to be specified by this Hon'ble Court, in accordance with the district allotted to the petitioner;

(b). a writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to function as an Assistant Teacher in a Junior Basic School under the respondents and to pay the petitioner his regular monthly salary on the said post regularly every month;

(c). any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case;

(d). award cost of the petition to be paid to the petitioner."

3. The petitioner has appeared in the selection of Assistant Teacher Recruitment Examination-2019. The petitioner was selected in the written examination and was called for counseling. The petitioner appeared in the counseling. According to the petitioner, his candidature was rejected on the ground that he has given wrong marks of the High School in the application form. In the aforesaid backdrop, he has prayed for the aforesaid relief.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the marks sheet downloaded from the website of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh, Prayagraj, it is evident that the grace marks which has been awarded to the petitioner in the subjects of Mathematics and Science have been included in the actual marks obtained by him in those subjects. Accordingly, he submits that if the grace marks are added in actual marks, he has secured 328 marks which have been correctly filled in by him in the application form. He submits that Regulation 20 of Chapter XII of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1921') does not preclude the grace marks awarded to a candidate to be added in the marks secured by a candidate in a subject, therefore, in the original marks sheet issued by the Board of High School & Intermediate Education, U.P., the grace marks ought to have been added in the marks secured by petitioner in the subjects of Mathematics and Science.

5. He further submits that petitioner has correctly filled in the marks secured by him in the application form. He further contends that even if the quality point marks are calculated treating the petitioner to have secured 325 marks, the aggregate of the petitioner would be 67.30 which is much more than the last selected candidate who is allotted district Sitapur. Thus, he submits that the authorities have acted illegally in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner.

6. He lastly contends that there is no stipulation in the advertisement that grace marks are not to be included while filling up the marks obtained in High School, and therefore, for this reason also, the respondents-authorities have acted illegally in rejecting the candidature of the petitioner.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the marks sheet which has been relied upon by the petitioner, Annexure 8 to the writ petition, is a provisional marks sheet wherein, in paragraph 1 under the heading 'DISCLAIMER', it is mentioned that this is not the original marks sheet. He has further placed reliance upon paragraph 3 of the 'DISCLAIMER' clause to contend that it is clearly mentioned that neither Board of High School & Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh, Prayagraj nor service provider is responsible for any inadvertent error that may have crept into the scoreboard/result being published on the website of Uttar Prade