KULDEEP KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had filed the instant writ petition by asserting, that for evaluation of her merit for selection against the advertised posts of ETT teachers, she had secured 130.12 marks.

(2.) In order to controvert the calculation of the petitioner in assessing the marks earned by her, learned counsel for the respondents has invited our attention to the marks obtained by her in the B.A. examination (Annexure P-2) so as to conclude, that the petitioner had secured 63.125% marks in the aforesaid examination. Learned counsel for the respondents has also invited our attention to the marks obtained by the petitioner in the B.Ed. examination (Annexure P-3), which reveals, that the petitioner had earned 64% marks therein. Cumulatively, on the basis of the percentage of marks earned by the petitioner in the aforesaid examinations, it is submitted, that the petitioner would be entitled to 127.125 marks (63.125+64). Accordingly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents, that no candidate with marks lesser than the marks obtained the petitioner, has been appointed, in view of the fact, that the last selected candidate had secured 129 marks.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner acknowledges, that the evaluation of the petitioner as being entitled to 130.12 marks in the instant writ petition, was as a matter of mistake or oversight. The marks evaluated by the respondents, as have been noticed in the foregoing paragraph, are acknowledged.