JUDGMENT : 1. Petitioner had applied for the post of Teacher in response to advertisement No.05 of 2013 dated 02.03.2013 and advertisement No. 06./2013 dated 10.05.2013. A common written test was conducted for both the aforementioned advertisements. Petitioner was issued two admit cards for appearing in the common written test. Petitioner submitted representation Annexure F to the Secretary, JKSSRB indicating therein that she was one and the same person but had been issued two admit cards reflecting her father's name in one and husband's name in another. However, receipt of the representation has been denied by the J&KSSRB. 2. The fact remains that there was one common written test and qua advertisement No.05/2013. The petitioner participated in the same. The cut off points in the written test qua advertisement No.05/2013 were 90.00 while in respect of advertisement No.06/2013, the cut off points were 81.9101. Thereafter, interview was conducted which was also common for both the aforementioned advertisements. Petitioner had appeared under RBA Category and in respect of advertisement No.05 of 2013 the cut off points were 58.199 while for advertisement No.06/2013, the cut off points were 53.2959. The petitioner secured 91.0112 points in common written test and 54.8652 points in the final selection merit. However, the petitioner was shortlisted only against notification No. 05/2013 on account of the fact that qua second advertisement, the petitioner had given her particulars as daughter of Mohd Amin, whereas in respect of advertisement No.5, she had given her particulars as wife of Abdul Majid. 3. Learned Dy.AG states that admittedly, the petitioner participated in the common written test and common interview, but has not been shown as selected candidate under RBA category qua advertisement No.06 solely on the ground of mention of her father's name in her particulars and had the petitioner mentioned the same particulars i.e. either father’s name or husband’s name in the application in response to both the advertisement, then there would not have been any difficulty. The stand of J&K SSRB is highly technical. Once, it is admitted that a common written test was conducted for advertisement Nos. The stand of J&K SSRB is highly technical. Once, it is admitted that a common written test was conducted for advertisement Nos. 05 of 2013 as well as 06 of 2013 and there was common interview for both the advertisements, then the petitioner could not have been denied appointment merely on the ground that in response to one advertisement, she had mentioned her husband's name and in response to other advertisement, she had mentioned her father's name while giving her particulars in the application. 4. What is of paramount importance is that a candidate is to be selected as per merit in order to ensure that the most suitable candidate is appointed to the post. As has been noted above, the petitioner secured more marks than cut off marks qua both the advertisements in the written test and more than the total cut off marks qua advertisement No.06/2013. Learned counsel contends that, in fact, the petitioner secured more marks than the candidate shown as standing first in the merit list under RBA category. 5. In view of the position as noted above, I am of the considered view that denial of recommendation of the name of the petitioner by the J&KSSRB despite the factual position having been brought to its notice by the petitioner is not justified. Accordingly, respondent- J&KSSRB is directed to forthwith recommend the name of the petitioner as selected candidate for appointment to the post of Teacher qua advertisement No.06/2013. Needless to mention, the appointment of the petitioner will relate to the same date w.e.f which other candidates selected in response to advertisement No. 06/2013 have been appointed. Needful be done within a period of two weeks from date of submission of certified copy of order. 6. Writ petition is allowed in the aforementioned terms.