JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. I.S. Mehra and Mr. S.S. Yadav, Advocates for the petitioner and Mr. B.P.S. Mer, Brief Holder for the State/respondents. 2. The petitioner has been selected as a Primary School Teacher in a Government School and has already participated in the counselling and now awaits her formal appointment letter. According to the petitioner, out of approximately 1100 selected candidates the name of the petitioner is shown at Sr. No. 154 in the order of merit. The home district of the petitioner is also shown as Nainital in the select list. The petitioner has been selected under women category. 3. According to the petitioner, considering that she was higher in the merit list, she was liable to be given the district of her choice which was Nainital. However, the petitioner admits that due to her own fault, as the petitioner on a total misreading of the preference asked in the application form, instead of giving her order of choice against the said districts, has given the Serial Numbers of such districts. 4. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Nainital and it is also apparent that she is quite high in the merit list and, therefore, according to the petitioner, her natural choice was Nainital. But, since the petitioner has given first choice to Pithoragarh, she was asked to participate in the counselling at Pithoragarh, which she has admittedly done. Now, all the petitioner prays is that considering it was a bona fide mistake, the Director of Education (Primary) may consider this aspect and if it appears to him that mistake has been committed by the petitioner in her application form bonafidely, he may consider for allotting a school to the petitioner in district Naintal or Udham Singh Nagar, which would be her first and second choice respectively (Pithoragarh being 6th choice of the petitioner). 5. It is an admitted fact that a candidate has to be appointed in any of the thirteen districts of the State irrespective of his/her place of residence. But in his application form a candidate has to mark the districts in order of his choice and considering the marks obtained by him, he has to be given appointment. The case of the petitioner is that had she not committed the mistake, she would have been given Nainital, a fact which is also by and large admitted by the learned State Counsel. The case of the petitioner is that had she not committed the mistake, she would have been given Nainital, a fact which is also by and large admitted by the learned State Counsel. Learned State Counsel submits that this concession cannot be given to the petitioner considering that she has already given her first choice as Pithoragarh, for which she was called for counselling. 6. Considering the fact that the petitioner is a woman and has got two minor children, who needs to be taken care of, writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to move a representation before the concerned Director of Education (Primary) for her grievance. Upon receiving such a representation, the Director of Education (Primary) shall consider the same and if he/she is satisfied that the mistake committed by the petitioner was a bona fide mistake, then he/she may in his/her discretion consider allotting the petitioner a school in District Nainital or a district as her second choice, provided posts are available.