Tanya Gupta
Published on: March 22, 2022, at 20:29 IST
In the case of Poonam Pal D/o Laxman Singh Pal Vs Madhya Pradesh Gramin Bank, a Government Bank is directed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court to reverse its Canceling of Candidature Order for the Post of Office Assistant (Multi-Purpose) merely due to a Typographical Error in the Applicant’s Date of Birth.
The Court further directed the Bank to issue an Appointment Order in her favor.
“It is not the case of Respondent itself that the Petitioner has derived any Advantage by entering the wrong Date of Birth in the Application. There was no Intentional Misrepresentation on part of the Petitioner as she had submitted her School Certificate. There is a difference between a mere Inadvertent Error and Misrepresentation or Suppression. Cancellation of Candidature of Petitioner on the ground of Typographical Error in her Application Form is hence Arbitrary and Grossly Disproportionate to the Gravity of her Lapse,” Justice Pranay Verma observed.
In the instant case, the Petitioner had appeared in a Written Exam for Office Assistant’s (Multi-Purpose) post. The Respondent Bank successfully cleared her for the same.
However, during the Process of submitting her Application Form, the Petitioner made a Typographical Error and mentioned 02.11.1991 as her Date of Birth instead of 04.11.1991.
An Offer Letter was initially being provided to her by the Respondent but her candidature was later Rejected at the Stage of Documents Verification because of an Error in her mentioned Date of Birth.
The Petitioner argued that she has not gained anything from the incorrect Date of Birth and asserts that she was Eligible for the said Post anyway.
She further added that the Typographical Error was an Unintended Mistake that should be condoned as she was duly selected on Merit.
The Court opined that even though when there is any Discrepancy in the Application Form, the Candidature should be canceled even after the Candidate has been allowed to appear in the Selection Process but, without the scrutiny of the Gravity of Lapse, her Candidature should not be rejected when the Petitioner has cleared all the stages successfully.
The Court noted that it was neither a case of Intended Misrepresentation on behalf of the Petitioner nor she has gained any Undue Advantage out of her Mistake.
Hence, considering the aforesaid observations, the Court directed the Respondent Bank to consider her Candidature and Issue an Appointment Order in her favor.
Also Read: Review Jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India
