P. B. BAJANTHRI, J.:–Heard learned counsels for the respective parties. 2. In the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:— That this is an application for issuance of appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) to the respondents to consider and publish the result of the petitioner as a successful candidate, for the post of Agriculture coordinator treating her as successful candidate under the W.B.C./B.C. category against the existing vacancies in pursuance to the Advertisement No. 02010/15 published by the Respondent Commission. And to quash the order dated 22.07.2017 passed and issued by the responsible respondent authorities, whereby and where under the claim of the petitioner as B.C./W.B.C. Category has been rejected and after scrutining she has been treated as General Category in a very mechanical manner although she comes under W.B.C./ B.C. category, which has been issued under the signature of the Secretary, Bihar Staff Selection Commission, Patna vide Memo No. 2116 dated 18.08.2017. And/Or Pass such any other order / orders which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The petitioner is a candidate for recruitment to the post of Agriculture Co-ordinator under Backward Class category. Her candidature is rejected on the ground that in her caste certificate category and caste is not reflected. The caste certificate dated 27.02.2016 reads as under:— fcgkj ljdkj iQkWeZ dk;kZy; dk uke ftyk% x;k vuqe.My% x;k lnj vapy% lnj x;k Áek.k&i= vkosnu la[;k% 040719353091603350 fnukad 27-02-2016 Áek.k&i= la[;k% lh@16@03546 Áekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS fd Jh@Jherh@lqJh jtuh fÁ;n'kZuh iq=@iq=h d`".kk dqekj xkao@'kgj eqLriQkckn iksLV vkWfiQl jkeiqj Fkkuk jkeiqj Fkkuk Á[kaM lnj x;k vuqeaMy x;k lnj ftyk x;k jkT; fcgkj] ;kno ¼Xokyk] vghj] xksi lnxksi½ leqnk; ds lnL; gSA LFkku% lnj x;k] x;k gLrk{kj fnukad% 27-02-2016 ¼vapykfèkdkjh½ eqgj lfgr fcgkj jkT; 4. Perusal of the aforesaid certificate, it is evident that the petitioner’s caste has been mentioned as “Yadav” and it would fall under BC category. 5. Next question is whether in not mentioning the B.C. category in the caste certificate, petitioner cannot claim reservation under B.C. category or not? 6. The petitioner applied for issuance of a caste certificate and the caste certificate has issued by the competent authority/ designated authority, namely, Circle Officer, Block Sadar Gaya. 5. Next question is whether in not mentioning the B.C. category in the caste certificate, petitioner cannot claim reservation under B.C. category or not? 6. The petitioner applied for issuance of a caste certificate and the caste certificate has issued by the competent authority/ designated authority, namely, Circle Officer, Block Sadar Gaya. If the Circle Officer, Block Sadar Gaya has committed error in not mentioning that the ‘Yadav’ community/caste is fall under BC category and in not mentioning that caste certificate is issued with BC category, the petitioner shall not suffer. There is non-application of mind in rejecting the petitioner’s claim that as if the caste is not mentioned in the certificate dated 27.02.2016. 7. On the contrary, it is evident that the Circle Officer, Block Sadar Gaya has clearly stated that petitioner belongs to ‘Yadav’ caste. Therefore, what remains is in not mentioning B.C. category. It is too technical to reject the petitioner’s claim under BC category merely in not mentioning BC category in the caste certificate dated 27.02.2016. Such error has been committed by the Circle Officer, Block Sadar Gaya and it is beyond the control of petitioner. 8. Therefore, the impugned order dated 22.07.2017 stands set aside. The petitioner's name shall be considered for the post of Agriculture Co-odinator pursuant to the Advertisement no. 02010115 under BC category within a period of three months from the receipt of copy of this order, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible, the order of appointment shall be issued. 9. The writ petition stands allowed.