Category correction in examination forms is impermissible after the expiration of the prescribed correction window.

The petitioner applied online for the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) 2026 conducted by CGVyapam

Due to an inadvertent error, she marked her category as "OBC Creamy Layer" instead of "OBC Non-Creamy Layer"

According to the examination instructions, the last date for filing the form was 08-12-2025, with a correction window available from 09-12-2025 to 11-12-2025

The petitioner failed to utilize this window and submitted a representation for correction only on 20-03-2026, following the declaration of the examination results

Consequently, she approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to correct her category status and issue a fresh certificate

Whether the Court can direct the respondents to consider a representation for correction of category status filed after the expiry of the stipulated correction window and the declaration of results.

The court followed the principle that candidates are bound by the specific timelines and instructions provided in the examination notification regarding the correction of online forms

It relied on the precedents set by the Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court in Dharmendra Kumar v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (Writ Appeal No. 770/2024) and Preeti v. Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (Writ Appeal No. 11/2025), which established that category corrections cannot be entertained beyond the prescribed period

The Court observed that Clause 3 of the respondents' instructions (Annexure R-1) explicitly provided a three-day window for correcting errors in the online application form immediately following the submission deadline

The Court noted that the petitioner’s representation was submitted approximately three months after this window closed and only after the examination results had been declared

Applying the ratio from the cited Division Bench judgments, the Court reasoned that the petitioner had lost the legal right to seek corrections once the stipulated time had elapsed

The Court emphasized that procedural timelines in public examinations must be strictly adhered to and that the petitioner’s delay was fatal to her claim

It held that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as the request for correction was submitted far beyond the stipulated period provided in the instructions

The Court declined to direct the respondents to decide on the pending representation as the petitioner had forfeited her opportunity to correct the online form