Order : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner applied for appointment in State Administrative Service through 2nd, 3rd and 4th Deputy Collector Limited Competitive Examination, 2010 as per Adv. No. 09/2010 being a Assistant in the office of the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Chatra. He also claims to be belonging to physically handicapped category suffering from Loco Motor Disability for which horizontal reservation was provided in the advertisement itself. Petitioner's candidature has been rejected as he incorrectly filled up the OMR sheet more specifically Roll Number. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for such hyper technical reasons, petitioner should not be penalized when equal responsibility also lies upon the Invigilator to impart correct instructions during the course of examination. It is also urged that under RTI in First Appeal No. 151/2013, ground of non selection of the petitioner category is shown as absence of vacancy in the physical handicapped though it is contrary to the terms of advertisement specifically clause-(Gha). Therefore valuable chance to be appointed in the administrative service stands denied to the petitioner on such hyper technical ground. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-JPSC submits that examination was of objective type, where answer sheet i.e. OMR sheet are to be filled up as per instructions contained therein and were evaluated through computerized system. No departure can be made in individual cases manually if a candidate has incorrectly filled up/blackened the circle relating to answer or even the Roll No., Station Code, Exam Code etc. Petitioner is conscious of his mistake as would appear from his representation at Annexure-5. Jharkhand Public Service Commission had also notified the list of candidates, whose cases were rejected due to non shadow/wrong shadow of Roll No./Booklet No. etc. in the OMR sheet. Therefore, candidature of the petitioner cannot be considered on that ground. 5. Having considered the rival submissions of the parties in the factual backdrop of the case, since petitioner admittedly filled up Roll Number in the OMR sheet incorrectly, his answer sheet could not be evaluated through computerized evaluation system adopted by examining body in the conduct of Deputy Collector Limited Competitive Examination. 5. Having considered the rival submissions of the parties in the factual backdrop of the case, since petitioner admittedly filled up Roll Number in the OMR sheet incorrectly, his answer sheet could not be evaluated through computerized evaluation system adopted by examining body in the conduct of Deputy Collector Limited Competitive Examination. When such uniform procedure has been adopted by the examining body JPSC, no exception can be made to the case of the petitioner if he has incorrectly filled up OMR sheet in spite of instructions contained in the OMR sheet as well as in the admit card also. Information furnished under RTI is in relation to query made by the petitioner about selection in physical handicapped category and such consideration could only have arisen if the petitioner's answer sheet could have been evaluated without suffering from any error or defect as has been found to be. 6. In such circumstances, writ petition being without any merit is, accordingly, dismissed.