In technology-driven, large-scale recruitment processes, candidates must exercise due diligence; post-facto modification of category or application details is not permissible after the closure of the officially notified correction windows to maintain process sanctity and prevent administrative delay.

Order

1. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

“(a) The respondents may kindly be directed to correct the petitioner's application form by treating her under the "OBC widow (Non TSP)" category instead of "Divorcee" category.

(b) That the respondent may kindly be directed to rectify the clerical/typographical error in the petitioner's name and date of birth in the application records.

(c) The respondents may kindly be directed to permit the petitioner to participate in the process of document verification and consider her candidature for appointment on the post of Class IV employee in accordance with her merit.”

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, belongs to the Other Backward Class (OBC) category and is a widow suffering from 80% disability, thereby falling within a highly vulnerable section of society. Being eligible for reservation benefits available to widows in public employment, she applied for appointment pursuant to an advertisement issued by the respondent department for recruitment to Class IV posts. Relevant documents, including her disability certificate and her husband’s death certificate, substantiate her eligibility. While filling out the online application form, the petitioner, due to lack of technical knowledge and a bona fide human error, inadvertently selected the “Divorce” category instead of the “Widow” category. Additionally, certain clerical mistakes occurred in the spelling of her name and in entering her date of birth. These errors were neither deliberate nor intended to gain any undue advantage. Upon realizing the mistakes, the petitioner submitted an affidavit clarifying the inadvertent errors. The petitioner was issued an admit card and appeared in the examination conducted on 19.09.2025. Upon declaration of the result on 18.01.2026, she secured 28 marks, which placed her well within the zone of consideration under the widow category, where the prescribed cut-off was significantly lower. Importantly, the recruitment process is still ongoing and the stage of document verification has not yet been conducted; thus, no third-party rights have crystallized. Immediately after noticing the error, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 13.02.2026 to the respondent authorities, seeking correction of her category and other clerical mistakes, along with supporting documents. However, despite the pendency of the recruitment process, the respondents have neither decided her representation nor permitted correction of the bona fide errors. Aggrieved by such inaction, which is arbitrary and prejudicial, the petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court by filing the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the petitioner is a widow and has about 80% permanent disability, so she belongs to a vulnerable group for whom reservation benefits are meant. He further states that the mistake in the online application was a genuine human error due to lack of technical knowledge, and not an attempt to mislead or commit fraud, therefore, rejecting her application only because of this inadvertent mistake goes against the purpose of providing reservation benefits and the petitioner should hae been given an opportunity to rectify it.

4. He further submits that the mistake in the application form does not affect the petitioner’s eligibility and does not give her any undue advantage, since she was a widow on the last date of application and continues to be so, therefore, the correction only reflects the true facts.

5. He further submits that the recruitment process is still ongoing and has not