A disclosed in-service status permits correction of an inadvertent cadre-reservation error before the select list.

In brief

The question

Whether the petitioner could be permitted to correct his application to claim cadre reservation as an in-service candidate despite the expiry of the correction period.

The court held

The Court disposed of the petition and directed Respondent No. 2 to permit the petitioner to amend the cadre-reservation field and include his name in the relevant list of candidates claiming cadre reservation as an in-service candidate.

It also directed

The petitioner’s selection remains subject to merit, and the respondent was directed to act forthwith.

01Facts

The petitioner, a Commandant in the Karnataka State Reserve Police (KSRP), applied for selection to the post of Karnataka Civil Police Constable.

¶ 2–3

Although he declared in his application that he was a government servant employed in the KSRP, he inadvertently selected “No” in the cadre-reservation field. His name consequently appeared in the direct-recruits score list.

¶ 6–10

He sought correction shortly after publication of the preliminary score list and renewed his request before the physical examination, which he passed.

¶ 6–10

At the hearing, the select list had not yet been published.

¶ 2–3, 6–10

02Issues

i.Whether the petitioner could be permitted to correct his application to claim cadre reservation as an in-service candidate despite the expiry of the correction period.

¶ 4, 11–12

ii.Whether permitting the correction before publication of the select list would prejudice other candidates or cause administrative disruption.

¶ 4, 11–12

03Law Applied

The petition was brought under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶ 8–12

The Court applied the equitable principle that correction of an application may be allowed in the particular circumstances where the relevant eligibility information was already disclosed in the application, the error was inadvertent, the request was made before finalisation of the selection, and correction would not prejudice the rights of others.

¶ 8–12

The Court also directed that selection remain merit-based.

¶ 15

04Reasoning

The application already stated that the petitioner was a government servant working in the KSRP; the inconsistent “No” response appeared only in the cadre-reservation field.

¶ 6–12

The Court considered this an inadvertent error, noted that the petitioner sought correction after the score list was published and again before the physical test, and took account of his having passed that test.

¶ 6–12

Because the select list had not yet been published and the petitioner’s employment was already disclosed, the Court found that permitting correction would be equitable and would not prejudice other candidates.

¶ 6–12