IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA th ON THE 10 OF JULY, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 15670 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

SMTBHAWANA GUPTA W/O SHRI KAMAL KISHORE GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O H NO 6 CHANDRA SHEKHAR AJAD WARD TEHSIL AND DISTRICT KATNI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION R/O VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. THE COMMISSIONER LOK SHISHAN SANCHALNALAYA GAUTAM NAGAR BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATION BOARD CHAYAN BHAWAN MAIN BHOPAL NO. 1 CHINAR PARK (EAST) BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI ROHIT JAIN - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs :-

"(i) To issue an appropriate writ/direction in regard to Signature Not Verified Signed by: KAFEEL AHMED permit the petitioner to participate in selection proceeding for appointment of Middle School Teacher.

(ii) To permit the petitioner for participate the further coming selection of Middle School Teacher through illegibility test as petitioner is entitled for that as having E.W.S. Card to her credit. (iii) Any other reliefs is provided to the petitioner according to circumstances of the case."

2. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the minimum qualifying proportionate marks as per the eligibility test is 79 whereas the petitioner had scored 78.78 marks, therefore, after rounding off the marks obtained by the petitioner, it should be taken as the petitioner has scored 79 marks.

3. The question involved in the present case is as to whether the rounding off the marks is permissible or not.

4. The question is no more res integra.

5. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Bhupendra Kumar Dubey Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others decided on 30.01.2020 in W.P. No.1977/2020 has held as under :-

"6. The orders passed in the cases of Jitendra Shukla (supra), Ku. Bhawna Mishra (supra) and also in Dharmendra Kumar Shrivastava (supra) as well as the letter (Annexure P-3) of the Additional Secretary are of no assistance for the petitioner in view of the various pronouncements of the Supreme Court on this issue. The Apex Court in the case of Orissa Public Service Commission and another Vs. Rupashree Chowdhary and another – (2011) 8 SCC 108, has held as under :-

“11. We may also draw support in this connection from a decision of this Court in Vizianagaram Social Welfare Residential School Society v. M. Tripura Sundari Devi- (1990) 3 SCC 655. In the said judgment this Court has laid down that : (SCC p. 658, para 6)

“6. … when an advertisement mentions a particular qualification and an appointment is made in disregard of the same, [then] it is not a matter only between the appointing authority and the appointee concerned. The Signature Not Verified Signed by: KAFEEL AHMED aggrieved are all those who had similar or even better qualifications than the appointee or appointees but who had not applied for the post because they did not possess the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement.”

7. This aspect of the matter has also been considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore Vs. G. Hemlatha and others, (2012) 8 SCC 568 wherein it is observed that when the eligibility criteria is prescribed in the qualifying examination, it must be strictly adhered to and any dilution or tampering with it will work injustice on other candidates. The relevant extract from the said judgment is reproduced as under:-

“12. No provision of any statute or any rules framed thereunder have been shown to us, which permit rounding - off of eligibility criteria prescribed for the qualifying examination for admission to the PG course in