Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shivakant Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 March, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 6 th OF MARCH, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 4817 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
SHIVAKANT TIWARI S/O SHRI RAJESH TIWARI, AGED
ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT R/O
VILLAGE AND POST GORGAON, 165 TEHSIL RAIPUR
KARCHULIYAN, DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI NITYA NAND MISHRA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COMMISSIONER LAND RECORD MADHY
PRADESH BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. MADHYA PRADESH EMPLOYEES SELECTION
B O AR D CHAYAN BHAWAN MAIN ROAD NO.1
CHINAR PAKR (EAST) BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. COLLECTOR REWA DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. EXAMINATION CONTROLLER MADHYA
PRADESH EMPLOYEES SLECTION BOARD
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI VIVEK SHARMA - DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Petitioner's contention is that the petitioner was a candidate for the post
of Patwari. He had filled a form for the examination which was to be
conducted by Madhya Pradesh Employees Selection Board i.e. respondent
No.5. In that form, he had filled a column showing that he is eligible for 5%
bonus marks under the head of 10 criterias as have been reproduced by him in
para 5.2.
2. It is submitted that though petitioner did not fulfill any of the criterias
mentioned in para 5.2.1 and does not fall in any of the 10 critrias mentioned
therein, but it was erroneously filled in the examination form and, therefore, in
the light of the judgment of High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at
Jaipur in Division Bench Civil Writ Petition No.1587/2022, decided on
04.02.2022, wherein, Hon'ble Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court has held
that "To err is human, to forgive is divine", the mistake can be of two kinds.
First kind of mistake would not be where nobody is affected by a mistake and
the second mistake where a third party is affected by a mistake. The difference
in two mistakes would be that whereas the rectification of the first mistake
would cause no prejudice, rectification of the second would cause a prejudice."
3. This court is of the opinion that ratio of said judgment has no application
to the facts and circumstances of the present case, inasmuch as, petitioner was
required to make a true and correct representation while filling the application
form which was issued by the Employees Selection Board for selecting the
Patwaris. As per the Scheme pointed out by Shri Vivek Sharma, learned
Deputy Advocate General, after the cut off date, there is a date for correction of
the entries made in the form. Thus, petitioner had sufficient opportunity to
correct the entries before conduct of the examination and in case before the
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, details of the postal order were
inaccurately filled and that was treated to be an innocuous act of omission on
the part of the petitioner therein.
4. Herein, petitioner with a view to obtain benefit of 5% bonus marks, which
is specifically for 10 categories mentioned in para 5.2.1, filled that he belongs to
that category and thus, that will amount to misrepresentation and cannot be
treated to be an innocuous mistake which could be allowed by the Court to be
corrected and that too after conduct of the examination and declaration of
result.
5. Thus, filling of the form giving incorrect information amounts to
suppression and that would liable the petitioner's examination form itself to be
cancelled and, therefore, in view of such facts, no relief can be given to the
petitioner.
6. Accordingly, petition fails and is dismissed.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
A.Praj.
