D. K. SETH, J. ( 1 ) SINCE the facts of both these cases are inter-connected with the consent of the parties, both these writ petitions are taken up together. ( 2 ) MR. Ranbir Singh, learned Counsel appears on behalf of Mr. Jagdeo Singh Chauhan in writ petition No. 16217 of 1997. Mr. K. N. Saxena appears for the Committee of Management being respondent No. 2 in writ petition No. 16217 of 1997. Mr. A. K. Yadav appears on behalf of U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission. Dr. I. R. Singh appears on behalf of Mr. Suresh kumar Jain, petitioner No. 2 in writ petition No. 34982 of 1997. ( 3 ) I have heard all the Counsel at length who had addressed the Court on the merits of both the writ petitions. ( 4 ) THE facts of the case are as follows : A notice was published for selection of Head Master by the Commission. In the advertisement, the name of the school Sri Chhatrasal Zila Parishad uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyala, Narhat, Lalitpur was mis-spelt as Sri Kshatrapal Uchchatar madhyamik Vidyala, Narhat. On this misspelling in the name of the school in the advertisement, the Committee of Management did not allow the petitioner who was selected by the Commission for being appointed on the post of Head Master of the School. Therefore, the petitioner Jagdeo singh Chauhan had filed the writ petition No. 16217 of 1997. The Committee of Management had filed counter affidavit to this writ petition and had opposed the case of the petitioner. While mr. A. K. Yadav, learned Counsel for the Commission had supported the case of the petitioner. The stand taken by the Committee of Management is that there was no advertisement for selection of Head Master of the said School. Therefore, the selection of the petitioner cannot be sustained. In paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit, such a stand has been taken. A reading of paragraph 4 shows that the name of the school is Sri Chhatrasal Zila Parishad Higher Secondary school, Narhat, district Narhat but in the advertisement the name was mis-printed as Sri kshatrapal Uchchatar Madhamik Vidyalaya, Narhat. In the counter affidavit has been pointed out that in Narhat there is no school named Kshatrapal Higher Secondary School. Thus there cannot be any doubt that Sri Chhatrasal have been mis-spelt as Sri Kshatrapal. In the counter affidavit has been pointed out that in Narhat there is no school named Kshatrapal Higher Secondary School. Thus there cannot be any doubt that Sri Chhatrasal have been mis-spelt as Sri Kshatrapal. ( 5 ) IN writ petition No. 34982 of 1997 moved by the Committee of Management and Mr. Suresh kumar Jain a case has been made out in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that on the records of the commission, the name of the petitioners Institution was not mentioned though they were intimated that an interview would be held on 4th May, 1996 for selection of Head Master of the said School by the District Inspector of Schools. Such intimation was described by Mr. Suresh kumar Jain to have been made under misconception. Though statements have been made indirectly to show that petitioners were not given opportunity to participate in the interview, but in fact no specific statement has been made that pursuant to such intimation, the petitioners could not participate in the interview or the petitioner was refused participation in the interview. In the absence of such specific statement, a normal presumption would be that the petitioner Suresh kumar Jain was asked to appear in the interview on 4th May, 1996. If he had not participated in the interview, he had done some at his peril. If he had participated in the interview, in that event, he now cannot challenge the wrong spelling of the Institution in the advertisement in view of the principle laid down in the cases of Arun Kumar Shukla v. Chancellor, Allahabad University, (1984) 1 UPLBEC 477, and Om Prakash Shukla v. A. K. Shukla, 1986 Lab. I. C. 790, wherein it has been held that after being unsuccessful, a candidate cannot turn round and challenge the selection on certain technical grounds or on the ground of absence of authority or otherwise. ( 6 ) MR. Yadav had produced copies of the records of the Commission relating to the selection of the Head Master of Sri Chhatrasal Zila Parishad, Uchchatar Madhymik Vidyalaya, Narhat. It appears that by a communicated dated 5th October, 1993 the Deputy Director, Jhanshi Mandal forwarded the particulars of the two seniormost teachers of Sri Chhatrasal Zila Parishad uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Narhat to the Secretary, U. P. Secondary Education Service commission in the requisition form. It appears that by a communicated dated 5th October, 1993 the Deputy Director, Jhanshi Mandal forwarded the particulars of the two seniormost teachers of Sri Chhatrasal Zila Parishad uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Narhat to the Secretary, U. P. Secondary Education Service commission in the requisition form. By another letter dated 20th April, 1996, the Deputy director had forwarded the particulars of the two seniormost teachers to the Secretary of the service Commission for appropriate steps. The said letter shows that the character roll and service book of Sri Suresh Kumar Jain was annexed as Annexure II to the said letter. A copy of the said letter was also marked to the Manager of Sri Chhatrasal Zila Parishad Uchchatar madhyamik Vidyalaya, Narhat, Lalitpur. Mr. Yadav had also produced the memo of interview in which the particulars of the interview of Sri Suresh Kumar Jain have been recorded. It appears that the said Sri Suresh Kumar Jain had deposited the interview fee of Rs. 67/- through receipt no. 21148. The said document shows that Sri Jain had participated in the interview. ( 7 ) THUS having participated in the interview and having been unsuccessful, it is not open to Sri s. K. Jain to challenge the said interview only on the ground that in the advertisement the name of the School was mis-printed as Sri Kshatrapal Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya instead of Sri chhatrasal Zila Panchayat Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Narhat. But in the advertisement region Jhansi, district Lalitpur, Narhat was also mentioned. In view of the statement made in paragraph 6 of the writ petition No. 34982 of 1997 by Sri S. K. Jain to the extent that there is no institution named Sri Kshtrapal Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Narhat and the petitoner, S. K. Jain having participated in the interview, it is presumed that the petitioner S. K. Jain has understood that the name of the school Chhatrasal Zila Parishad Uchchatar Madhyamik vidyalaya was mis-printed in the advertisement. The allegation that in the record of the commission the name of Chhatrasal Zila Parishad Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya was absent, appears to be misconceived or a mis-statement since from the record of the Commission, namely, the letters dated 5th October, 1993 and 20th April, 1996, it appears that the name of the school was recorded as Sri Chhatrasal Zila Parishad Uchchatar Madhamik Vidyalaya, Narhat. Mr. Mr. Yadav asserts that in the record of the Commission the name of the school was correctly recorded and there is no misspelling in the records of the Commissioner. The participation of the petitioner S. K. Jain in the interview itself shows that he was aware of the said situation. Therefore, no reliance could be placed on the statement made in paragraphs 7, 8, and 9 of the writ petition. No. 34982 of 1997 as has been sought to be supported by Mr. I. R. Singh to advance the claim of Mr. Suresh Kumar Jain. ( 8 ) AT the same time, the school authority had itself forwarded the service book and the character roll of Sri S. K. Jain and Sri Jagdishwar Prasad Sharma being the two seniormost teachers for being considered for appointment as Head Masters of the said Institution, to the Secretary, U. P. Secondary Education Service Commission by the letter dated 20th April, 1996. The District inspector of Schools, Lalitpur had also forwarded the requisition for appointment of Head master in the prescribed form, which was transmitted by the Deputy Director of Education, jhansi Region to the Service Commission. Thus it shows that the school authority was also aware of the selection of the Head Master who had sought to take advantage of the mis-printing of the name of the school Sri Chhatrasal as Sri Kshtrapal in the advertisement. The stand taken by the school authority appears to be very unfortunate since they had taken the stand only on the basis of the mis-printing in the advertisement though they were aware that the selection was being made for that every school, namely, Sri Chhatrasal when they themselves had admitted that there was no school named Sri Kshtrapal at Narhat and when in the records of the commission and in their correspondence the name of the School has been correctly spelt. Thus the stand taken either by the Committee of Management or by Sri Suresh Kumar Jain cannot be sustained. The mis-print in the advertisement does not alter the situation if all the parties have understood the fact thereof. After having participated in the process of selection, it is not open to an unsuccessful candidates to challenge the process of selection on the ground of mis-printing of the name of the school in the advertisement. The mis-print in the advertisement does not alter the situation if all the parties have understood the fact thereof. After having participated in the process of selection, it is not open to an unsuccessful candidates to challenge the process of selection on the ground of mis-printing of the name of the school in the advertisement. The participation in interview leads to a presumption that despite such mis-printing the candidate understood that the recruitment was being made for that particular school and he could decipher the correct name of the school mis-printed in the advertisement. On account of such participation a candidate does not suffer any prejudice due to the mis-printing of the name of the school in the advertisement. Neither the candidate has been denied nor he has been deprived of his right to participate and to be considered because of such mis-printing in the advertisement. The mis-printing was triffle and technical in the matter. No capital could be made out of it. ( 9 ) IN the result, the writ petition No. 16217 of 1997 succeeds and is allowed accordingly. The committee of Management being respondent No. 2 in writ petition No. 16217 of 1997 is, thereby, directed to allow the petitioner Mr. Jagdeo Singh Chauhan to join the post of Head master as soon he reports for joining the same. ( 10 ) LET a writ of mandamus do accordingly issue. The question of payment of salary to the petitioner shall be considered in accordance with law so far the period during which he was prevented from joining his duty by the appropriate authority, within a period of three months from the date the petitioner makes an appropriate representation before the concerned respondents. ( 11 ) WRIT Petition No. 34982 of 1997 is dismissed. No cost. .