Rajasthan High Court
Rajkumar Meena Son Of Shri Ram ... vs Secretary, Board Of Secondary ... on 22 July, 2022
Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Shubha Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Special Appeal Writ No. 928/2022
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9862/2022
Rajkumar Meena Son Of Shri Ram Meena, Aged About 22
Years, Resident Of Village And Post Jastana, Tehsil Bonli,
District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.)
----Appellant
Versus
1. Secretary, Board Of Secondary Education, Rajasthan
Ajmer, Rajeev Gandhi Vidya Bhawan, Shiksha Board
Colony, Civil Lines, Ajmer.
2. Coordinator, Rajasthan Eligibility Examination For
Teachers (REET)-2021, Board Of Secondary Education
Rajasthan Ajmer, Rajeev Gandhi Vidya Bhawan, Shiksha
Board Colony, Civil Lines, Ajmer.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Komal Kumari Giri, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.L. Saini, Additional Advocate
General
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA
Judgment / Order
22/07/2022
Heard.
Challenge in this appeal is to order dated 21.07.2022
passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby, the writ petition
filed by the appellant has been dismissed.
Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that
because of the inadvertent mistake, while filling up the
(2 of 3) [SAW-928/2022]
application form, incorrect entries were made and as soon as it
was realized, an application for correction was made, which has
not been allowed. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Dolly Chhanda Vs. Chairman, JEE & Ors.
(Appeal (Civil) No. 6506/2004, decided on 05.10.2004),
the Division Bench of this Court in Kavita Choudhary Vs.
The Registrar (Examination), Rajasthan High Court,
Jodhpur & Anr. (D.B. Civil Special Appeal Writ
No.1700/2017, decided on 01.11.2017) and the Single
Bench of this Court in Pramod Kumar & Anr. Vs.
Rajasthan Staff Selection Board (S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No. 6820/2021, decided on 22.09.2021, it is argued that a
bona fide mistake which does not affect the third party can be
allowed to be corrected at any stage of the competitive exam.
Mr. C.L. Saini, Additional Advocate General appearing on
advance copy for the respondents would submit that before the
learned Single Judge, it has been clearly stated that opportunity
of correction in the application form was granted to all the
candidates till 27.05.2022 and it was also published in the
news-paper, but the appellant did not avail that opportunity.
We are of the view that in the examination, a candidate is
required to submit his application form carefully. The appellant
did commit mistake. It is not in dispute that even after the last
date of submission of online application form, opportunity was
granted to all the candidates including the appellant to correct
the same till 27.05.2022, but the appellant failed to avail that
opportunity. The order passed by learned Single Judge also
shows that such an opportunity was granted not once but twice
(3 of 3) [SAW-928/2022]
to all the candidates and even news-paper publication was made
but the appellant failed to respond.
Once the respondents have allowed the candidates to
correct the defects not once, but twice, which has been widely
published in the news-paper, the appellant's grievance does not
merit any acceptance. In competitive examinations, the
candidates, who are not prompt and diligent, cannot claim
indulgence from this Court. Considering that the respondents
had given ample opportunity to correct but the appellant having
failed, the order passed by learned Single Judge does not
warrant any interference.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.
(SHUBHA MEHTA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J
Mohita /61
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
