Himachal Pradesh High Court
Decided On: 16Th May vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 16 May, 2025
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
2025:HHC:14299
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.4768 of 2025
Decided on: 16th May, 2025
_________________________________________________________________
Manjana ....Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents
_________________________________________________________________
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes
_________________________________________________________________
For the petitioner: Dr. Lalit K. Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant
Advocate General, for respondents
No. 1, 3 and 4.
Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate for
respondent No.2.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Petitioner's case is that while applying online for
the post in question through the aid of a Cyber Cafe, the
applied for category was inadvertently mentioned as
Scheduled Caste, whereas she belongs to Scheduled Tribe
and alongwith the application also, certificate of her
belonging to Scheduled Tribe was uploaded, therefore, the
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes
-2- 2025:HHC:14299
respondent No.2 has wrongly rejected her prayer for change
of category from Scheduled Caste to Scheduled Tribe.
2. From the joint submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties, following factual position emerges: -
2(i) Respondent No.2-Himachal Pradesh Public
Service Commission issued an advertisement on 04.10.2024
for recruitment against 380 posts of Constable (Female) for
specialized duties in Himachal Pradesh Police Department.
The closing date for furnishing Online Recruitment
Applications (ORA) was 31.10.2024. 380 posts of Constable
(Female) were further split-up category-wise, including the
categories of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
2(ii) As per Clause (C) of the advertisement, category of
candidate as claimed in the profile for the post was to be
treated as final. In case the candidate had inadvertently filled
her category wrongly in the ORA or her category underwent
change before the prescribed closing date for submission of
online recruitment application, then such candidate could get
her application modified by requesting the Commission to
that effect in writing. Clause (C) also covered situations
where a candidate finds out at any later stage, about her
-3- 2025:HHC:14299
having wrongly filled her category in ORA or there occurs
change of category which is beyond the control of the
candidate at any stage during the recruitment process, then
provided she has not availed any relaxed standards in terms
of experience, qualification etc. she could inform about it in
writing to the Commission at least 15 days before the
conduct of Physical Standard test, failing which, such
requests were not to be entertained by the Commission.
Clause (C) reads as under:-
"C Category Claims:-
The category of the candidate claimed in the
profile before she applies for the post shall be treated
as final. In case the candidate has inadvertently filled
her category wrongly in the ORA or her category
undergoes a change before the prescribed closing date
for submission of online recruitment application
through OTR portal then such candidate shall have to
get her application modified by requesting the
Commission to that effect in writing. However, in cases
where candidate finds out at any later stage that she
has wrongly filled her category in the ORA or there is
change of category which is beyond the control of the
candidate at any stage during the recruitment process;
provided she has not availed any relaxed standards in
terms of age, experience, qualification etc., she will
inform about it in writing to the Commission at least 15
days before the conduct of Physical Standard test
failing which no such type of requests shall be
entertained by the Commission. Decision on the
-4- 2025:HHC:14299
request to change the category shall be final."
As per Clause (F) of the advertisement, the
recruitment process was to include Physical Test, Written
Test, Evaluation & Document Verification and Medical
Examination.
2(iii) Petitioner submitted her ORA for the post of
Constable (Female) within the stipulated period with
assistance of a Cyber Café. She mentioned her category
therein as Scheduled Caste, though against this column the
certificate uploaded was of her belonging to Scheduled Tribe
Category. It is her case that she was not aware about
Scheduled Caste Category having been ticked in her ORA.
2(iv) Respondent No.2 issued admit card to the
petitioners, recording her category as Scheduled Caste.
Petitioner was to appear for the Physical Efficiency Test/
Physical Standard Test on 27.03.2025. The Physical
Efficiency Test/ Physical Standard Test was conducted by the
officials of the Police Department. It is the admitted case of
the respondents-Police Department that on 27.03.2025,
petitioner was provided with "Form Of Recruitment" at
registration counter, in which she filled her category as
-5- 2025:HHC:14299
Scheduled Tribe. Petitioner qualified the Physical Efficiency
Test/Physical Standard Test, however, the police officials
noticed discrepancy in petitioner having mentioned her
category as Scheduled Tribe in 'Form of Recruitment',
whereas, in her ORA, and admit card, her category was
mentioned as Scheduled Caste.
2(v) It is also the case of the Police Department i.e.
respondents No.1, 3 and 4 that petitioner was directed to
submit in writing to the District Recruitment Committee,
which conducted Physical Efficiency Test/Physical Standard
Test, to produce Scheduled Caste Category certificate.
Petitioner showed her inability to produce Scheduled Caste
Category certificate and reiterated that she belongs to
Scheduled Tribe Category and had already uploaded her
certificate in that regard. This is also mentioned in the
petitioner's representation dated 28.03.2025 made to the
District Recruitment Committee.
2(vi) On coming to know of the discrepancy in her ORA
and the admit card in relation to petitioner's category
mentioned therein, the petitioner represented to respondent
No.2 on 28.03.2025 to allow her to rectify the mistake that
-6- 2025:HHC:14299
had crept in her ORA and permit her to change her category
from Scheduled Caste to Scheduled Tribe. The Public Service
Commission rejected petitioner's request under an e-mail
dated 29.03.2025.
Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has instituted this
writ petition seeking following substantive reliefs:-
"I. That the impugned Email dated 29/03/2025
Annexure P7 may kindly be set aside and quashed
and the respondents may kindly be further directed to
consider the candidature of the petitioner to the vacant
post of Constable (female) against 13 post of ST
(unreserved) as detailed in Annexure P3.
II. That the respondents may be directed to permit the
petitioner to sit in the written test for the post of
Constable (female) against 13 post of ST (unreserved)
as and when it will be conducted by the respondents
as she has qualified the physical test."
3 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
considered the case file.
4 The sequence of facts given above clearly
indicates that present is a case of a bonafide and inadvertent
mistake committed by the petitioner while filling up her ORA
for the post of Constable (Female).
4(i) Petitioner has specifically pleaded that she
belongs to Scheduled Tribe Category; She had uploaded the
-7- 2025:HHC:14299
certificate of her belonging to Scheduled Tribe Category
alongwith ORA. This fact has not been specifically denied by
respondent No.2. None of the respondents have taken the
defence that petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste Category.
4(ii) As per the case pleaded by the petitioner, she had
taken assistance of a Cyber Café for submitting her ORA. In
the backdrop of the admitted fact that she belonged to
Scheduled Tribe Category, had uploaded the certificate of her
belonging to Scheduled Tribe Category alongwith her ORA,
her assertion that mentioning her category as Scheduled
Caste in ORA was an inadvertent mistake, deserves to be
given due credit.
4(iii) It is an admitted position that while appearing for
the Physical Efficiency Test/Physical Standard Test,
petitioner had filled in her category in the Form of
Recruitment as Scheduled Tribe. It was only later that the
police officials conducting the Physical Efficiency
Test/Physical Standard Test, noticed the discrepancy in the
ORA submitted by the petitioner and the Form of
Recruitment furnished by her in relation to her category. In
fact, even the tone and tenor of the reply filed by respondents
-8- 2025:HHC:14299
No.1, 3 and 4, gives the impression that petitioner became
aware of the mistake in mentioning her category in the ORA
only when the police officials had pointed this out to her on
28.03.2025. Immediately thereafter, i.e. on 28.03.2025 itself,
she represented to respondent No.2 to allow her to rectify the
error.
4(iv) Though the advertisement issued by respondent
No.2 states that rectification request should be made in
writing 15 days before conducting of Physical Efficiency
Test/Physical Standard Test, but this cannot be held against
the petitioner as she became aware of the discrepancy in her
category only on the day of holding of Physical Efficiency
Test/Physical Standard Test. Undeniably, the advertisement
does carry a stipulation allowing rectification of category
entered in the ORA. In these circumstances, the request of
the petitioner for allowing her to change her category from
Scheduled Caste as mentioned in her ORA to Scheduled
Tribe, which is her actual category, deserves to be allowed.
At this stage, it will be relevant to note Vashist
Narayan Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors2. The
question that arose for consideration before the Hon'ble Apex
Civil Appeal No.1 of 2024, decided on 02.01.2024,
-9- 2025:HHC:14299
Court was, whether the error committed in the application
form, which was uploaded, is a material or a trivial error and
whether the State was justified in declaring the appellant as
having failed on account of the same. In the aforesaid case,
the appellant had submitted his online application through
the assistance of Cyber Café, mentioning his incorrect date of
birth. The Hon'ble Apex Court held that the error was not so
grave so as to constitute wrong or misleading information.
Whenever any material discrepancy is noticed in the
application form and/or when any suppression and/ or
misrepresentation is detected, the candidature might be
cancelled even after the application has been processed and
the candidate has been allowed to participate in the selection
process. However, after a candidate has participated in the
selection process and cleared all the stages successfully, his
candidature can only be cancelled, after careful scrutiny of
the gravity of the lapse, and not for trivial omissions or
errors. Law does not concern itself with trifles.
In the instant case also, the facts as have come on
record do not project it to be a case of any misrepresentation
on part of the petitioner. It was case of an inadvertent error, a
- 10 - 2025:HHC:14299
bonafide error, which was committed probably at the end of
the Cyber Café whose assistance was taken by the petitioner
for filing the Online Recruitment Application. Nonetheless,
her category remains the same i.e. Scheduled Tribe
Category. Allowing the petitioner to change her category from
Scheduled Caste as mentioned in her ORA to Scheduled
Tribe, which is her actual Category, is not going to prejudice
anyone.
5. In view of above discussion, present writ petition
is allowed. Respondent No.2 is directed to permit the
petitioner to change her category from Scheduled Caste to
Scheduled Tribe in her application. The petitioner be
permitted to participate in the further selection process as a
candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe Category.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall
also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge
May 16, 2025
R.Atal
