A candidate is solely responsible for the accuracy of the information provided in an application form. Post-result modification of essential details, such as category, is impermissible, especially when a correction window was provided but not utilized, to maintain the integrity of the examination process.

Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI

(Cause Title is taken from CIS System)

Order on Board

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs :

“10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to this case from possession of the respondents for it's kind perusal;

10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to make suitable correction in the petitioner's caste detail by substituting OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) in place of OBC (Creamy Layer);

10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction commanding the respondent authorities to make suitable correction in the petitioner's result of Teacher's Eligibility Test (TET 26) following consequence of correction in the petitioner's caste detail as OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) instead of OBC (Creamy Layer);

Or The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ, order or direction commanding the respondent authorities to consider and decide the representation (Annexure P/1) preferred by the petitioner as early as possible preferably within a period of 15 days or within any other suitable period; and

10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2. Facts of the case, as projected, are that the petitioner applied for participation in the Teacher’s Eligibility Test (TET) 2026 for Upper Primary (Classes VI to VIII) in the subject of Social Studies/Social Science by submitting an online application on 28.11.2025. The petitioner asserts that she belongs to the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category falling under the Non-Creamy Layer, which is supported by the income certificate of her family showing annual income within the prescribed limit. It is the case of the petitioner that while filling up the online application form, she inadvertently selected the category of OBC (Creamy Layer) instead of OBC (Non-Creamy Layer). According to the petitioner, such error occurred due to inadvertence and without any intention to misrepresent her category. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued an admit card in January 2026 and she appeared in the examination conducted on 01.02.2026. Upon declaration of the result, the petitioner secured 81 marks out of 150 marks. However, since she was treated under the category of OBC (Creamy Layer), she was required to secure a minimum of 60% marks (i.e., 90 marks) and was thus declared ineligible. The petitioner contends that had she been correctly categorized under OBC (Non-Creamy Layer), she would have been entitled to relaxation in qualifying marks (i.e., 50% or 75 marks), and consequently would have been declared eligible. Aggrieved by the said result, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 23.03.2026 before the competent authority seeking correction of her category from OBC (Creamy Layer) to OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) along with consequential correction in her result. However, no decision has been taken on the said representation till date. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking appropriate directions.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) category and the incorrect selection of OBC (Creamy Layer) in the application form was purely inadvertent. It is contended that the petitioner had no intention to misrepresent her category and the documentary evidence on record clearly establishes her eligibility under the Non-Cr