JUDGMENT 1. The petitioners, in the present bunch of cases, had applied for the post of Ayurved Medical Officer, pursuant to recruitment notification dated 22.12.2020. While submitting their application forms, due to inadvertence, the petitioners have omitted to fill requisite column or have filled-in particulars in wrong box meant for the purpose. 2. Learned counsel submitted that in all these cases, out of two columns, meant for "experience", they have omitted to fill-in requisite information in one of the columns; whereas in SB Civil Writ Petition No.11654/2021, the petitioner had indicated minimum and maximum marks vice-versa in the column/box meant for such purpose. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in spite of doing well in the examination, the petitioners' names did not find mention in the provisional merit list of candidates and upon inquiry being made by them, they were informed by the respondent - University about the discrepancies mentioned above. 4. Mr. Bhandari, learned counsel for the petitioners, argued that the above referred errors are inadvertent and human errors and the same do not affect petitioners' eligibility, merit and other eligibility criteria. 5. It was also argued that the recruitment is in initial stage and if the petitioners are permitted to carry out the requisite corrections, rights of other candidates would not be affected at all. 6. Mr. Suniel Purohit, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - University, on the other hand, argued that all the candidates were given an option to correct the particulars in the application forms within 10 days of submitting the same, subject to the payment of requisite fee of Rs.300/-. 7. He argued that since the petitioners have failed to avail such opportunity, they cannot claim any indulgence at this belated stage. 8. While informing that all these petitioners had submitted their representations to correct the errors and a Committee constituted by the University rejected their representations, observing that the petitioners ought to have remained vigilant and should have availed the opportunity of getting correction done in the application forms, as permitted in the terms of the advertisement. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material available on record, this Court finds that the errors which have been crept in the petitioners' application forms are inadvertent, having hardly any bearing on petitioners' candidature, merit or otherwise. 10. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material available on record, this Court finds that the errors which have been crept in the petitioners' application forms are inadvertent, having hardly any bearing on petitioners' candidature, merit or otherwise. 10. True it is, that the petitioners ought to have been vigilant and should have availed the opportunity of getting correction/ rectification done in the application forms, however, the nature of errors, which have crept in case of present petitioners are such, that in normal circumstances, a candidate would not realise while submitting the form, more particularly, when there were two columns, particularly for the same information. 11. The writ petitions are, therefore, allowed. 12. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioners to carry out requisite corrections in the application forms manually after taking requisite fee of Rs.300/-, cash or through demand draft. 13. The petitioners may appear before the Registrar of the respondent - University tomorrow on 08.09.2021, who shall do the needful, as indicated above. 14. Needless to observe that petitioners' candidature shall be considered keeping in view the correction carried out and if they are found meritorious and otherwise eligible, shall be permitted to take part in the further process of recruitment. 15. The stay applications also stand disposed of accordingly.