Selection for Police Constable – Reserved Category – Shown as failed for difference in date of birth shown in the application and the school mark sheet.

Selection for Police Constable – Reserved Category – Final result shown the appellant as failed for difference in date of birth shown in the application and the school mark sheet.

According to the appellant, he filled in his form and uploaded it online with the assistance of a person running the Cyber Café. By inadvertence the date of was recorded as “8.12.1997” instead of “18.12.1997”.

The learned Single Judge held that incorrect information was given and no relief could be given.   The appeal was dismissed and also on another additional ground that the appellant had not sought relief to quash the result given on the website.

HELD that the question was whether the error in the application is a material or trivial error and whether the State was justified in declaring the appellant as failed on that count.

The appellant derived no advantage by showing wrong date of birth, if either of the dates were taken into consideration he was eligible, the error had no bearing on the selection and the appellant being oblivious of the error produced the educational certificates which reflected his correct date of birth.   The error was not “wrong” or “mis-leading” to enable the State to reject the application.

The exception for trivial errors on omissions is for the reason that the law does not concern itself with trifles.   This principle is recognised in the legal maxim – De minimis non curat lex.

Judgment dated 2.1.2024 in Civil Appeal No.1 of 2024 of Vashist Narayan Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar and others.