RUKSAR KHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "To err is human; to forgive, divine," wrote Alexander Pope in "An Essay on Criticism". He said this all about criticism of poetry; more about the critics approach to the work of others. Is it possible to apply the idea as a principle of remedial resort in legal matters? More particularly, can this idea inspire a selecting body or the employer, inviting applications for appointment to public posts, to allow candidates to correct mistakes in their application forms about data - figures and categories - whereon the relative merit of competing candidates depends?

(2.) These writ petitions were heard together as common questions of facts and law are involved. Accordingly, all the writ petitions are being decided by this judgment.

(3.) The petitioner, Ruksar Khan and others in the connected writ petitions are all candidates who have applied for posts of Assistant Teachers in Primary Schools maintained by the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Board. They have applied in response to an advertisement dated 05.12.2018, inviting applications from eligible candidates, who wish to participate in the Assistant Teachers Recruitment Examination, 2019, convened by the Examination Regulatory Authority, Prayagraj. The applications were required by the advertisement to be submitted online for registration of candidates intending to participate in the selection examination. In these applications, the candidates were required to fill up important personal details, educational qualifications etc., mentioning particulars such as roll numbers, relative to which a particular educational qualification was earned, the marks secured and the relative total marks, Special Reservation Category, if any, and the like. The advertisement bore a bold caution, figuring as a centrepiece, that makes candidates aware about a declaration they would have to make, while filling up the online registration form. It reads (translated into English from Hindi vernacular):