LexVASHIST NARAYAN KUMAR versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
* Author [2024] 1 S.C.R. 1 : 2024 INSC 2 Case Details Vashist Narayan Kumar v. The State of Bihar & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2024) 02 January 2024 [J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan*, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether an error committed in the application form, which was uploaded is a material error or a trivial error and was the State justified in declaring the appellant as having failed on account of the same. Headnotes Service Law – Recruitment – Inadvertent error in application form – Final result reflected failed – Appellant applied for the post of Police Constable – He cleared the written exam and the Physical Eligibility Test – However, the final result reflected him as failed – The only reason was that the application form uploaded online, appellant’s date of birth was shown as 08.12.1997, in the school mark sheet, his date of birth was reflected as 18.12.1997 – Propriety: Held: The appellant’s application uploaded from the cyber café did mention the date of birth as 08.12.1997, while his date of birth as recorded in the educational certificate was 18.12.1997 – It is also undisputed that it is the appellant who produced the educational certificates – He was oblivious of the error that had crept into his application form – On the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the error was so grave as to constitute wrong or mis-leading information – There is an exception for trivial errors or omissions as law does concern itself with trifles – This principle is recognized in the legal maxim-De minimis non curat lex – Also, admittedly the appellant derived no advantage as even if either of the dates were taken, he was eligible; the error also had no bearing on the selection process – Considering the background in which the error occurred, the cancellation is set aside and the respondent-State is directed to treat the appellant as a candidate who has ‘passed’ in the selection process. [Paras 11,12,15, 25, 26] 2 [2024] 1 S.C.R. DIGITAL SUPREME COURT REPORTS List of Citations and Other References Yogesh Kumar and Others vs. Govt. of NCT, Delhi and Others, [2003] 2 SCR 662 : (2003) 3 SCC 548 – distinguished. Divya vs. Union of India & Ors., 2023 INSC 900 : 2023 (13) SCALE 730; Prince Jaibir Singh vs. Union of India & Ors., C.A. No. 6983 of 2021 decided by the Supreme Court – referred to. Rohit Kumar and Another vs. Union of India and Others, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1219; Pradeep Kumar vs. Union of India and Others, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 239 – distinguished. Ajay Kumar Mishra vs. Union of India & Ors., [2016] SCC OnLine Del 6563; Arkshit Kapoor vs. Union of India, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 10154; Anuj Pratap Singh vs. Union Public Service Commission, 2018 SCC OnLine Del 10982; K. Sangeetha vs. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (2018) SCC OnLine Mad 5075; Shubham Tushir vs. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 9831; Staff Selection Commission & Anr. Vs. Shubham Tushir, LPA No. 237 of 2020; Poonam Pal vs. M.P. Gramin Bank, (2022) SCC OnLine MP 2921; Pankaj Paswan vs. State of Bihar Anr., 2015 SCC On Line Patna 8739 – referred to. List of Acts Constitution of India – Article 142. List of Keywords Service Law; Recruitment; Application form; Inadvertent error; De minimis non curat lex. Other Case Details Including Impugned Order and Appearances CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No.1 of 2024. From the Judgment and Order dated 22.08.2022 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in LPA No.1271 of 2019. [2024] 1 S.C.R. 3 VASHIST NARAYAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. Appearances: Shivam Singh, Ms. Shaswati Parhi, Gopal Singh, Advs. for the Appellant. Azmat Hayat Amanullah, Tirupati Gaurav Shahi, Advs. for the Respondents. Judgment / Order of The Supreme Court Judgment K.V. Viswanathan, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Vashist Narayan Kumar (the appellant) hails from a small village named Dheodha in Bihar. He belongs to the downtrodden segment of the society. He aspired to become a Police Constable and had applied for the said post under the reserved category. Having possessed the eligibility criteria of being an intermediate (10+2 pass), he also cleared the written examination and the Physical Eligibility Test. 3. The appellant submitted his educational certificates/mark sheet as well as his caste certificate for document verification. On 11.06.2018, the final results reflected him as having failed. The only reason was that, while in the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.