Judgment 1. The circumstances of this case have gone too far for the Court to put the clock back. Firstly, Rambha Shrivastava has been declared as a successful candidate in a published result in the newspaper against serial no. 65 under category 07 meant for economically backward class women category against serial no. 03/21572 with her date of birth recorded as 10 February, 1957 and marks obtained as 97. This is a result announced by the Bihar Lok Seva Ayog. This is borne out from annexure 4 to the writ petition. 2. The submission made by learned counsel for the Bihar Public Service Commission is, to the effect, that underlying circumstances do not bear out that this candidate may have applied with full information as a reserved candidate. He blames the Bihar Subordinate Service Selection Board for having done this error/mistake whether wilfully or otherwise. 3. If a result has taken finality as being publicly announced then it will not be appropriate for the Court to cancel the result. If the contention is that the result was based on fraud or collusion, then, the law permits to take care of such situations as a criminality for which positive steps have to be taken. It does not show that such steps had been taken. Fraud has to be pleaded on sounder footing. This implies that if the result of the petitioner appellant is to be cancelled then the man who arranged the fraud has to be dismissed first. The petitioner will go with him. 4. In the circumstances the record bears out that the petitioner was treated as a successful candidate against category 07 and the result was published publicly, the learned Judge committed an error in not granting the relief and accepting the result as announced. No case was made out for fraud or collusion. Thus, the judgment on the writ petition suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record. 5. The appeal is allowed and the judgment is set aside.