2025:JHHC:31205 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No.1162 of 2025 ----- 1.Tapan Sahu, S/o Gubra Sahu, R/o Vill- Chotatanrani, P.O. Pathanmara, P.S. Seraikella, Dist.- Seraikella-Kharswan, Jharkhand 2.Dinesh Mahato, S/o Baura Mahato, R/o Vill- Baldevpur, P.O. Hudu, P.S. Seraikella, Dist.- Seraikella Kharswan .... Petitioner(s). Versus 1.Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, P.O. + P.S. New Delhi, Dist. New Delhi 2.Chief Post Master General, Jharkhand Circle, Doranda, P.O. H.P.O, P.S. Doranda, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand 3.Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi through its Secretary, P.O. Namkum, P.S. Namkum, Dist. Ranchi Jharkhand … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, Advocate Mr. Arif Anwar, Advocate Mr. Yuvraj Singh, Advocate For the Resp.-UOI : Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma, Advocate …...... 11 / 09.10.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:- “For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/ direction(s), directing the concerned respondent to show cause as to why despite being eligible for applying to the post of Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS), notification of which has been published vide notification No.17-02/ 2025- GDS on 07.02.2025, petitioners are not being allowed to apply online for the said post since number of subjects given in the certificate of petitioners are 8 and option provided in the online application is only for 6 subjects. And/ Or For issuance of appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of mandamus, directing the concerned respondent to take immediate steps for resolution of the issue by either providing the petitioners to apply online with 8 subjects or in the alternative allow them to file application with best of 6 subjects with English, Hindi & Maths being the compulsory as provided in the notification.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners applied for the post of Gram Dak Sevak (GDS), but in the online application portal there was provision for entering only six subjects, whereas the petitioners have passed matriculation in eight subjects. He submits that since there was provision to fill up only 6 (six) subjects in the online form, petitioner had filled up the six subjects in which they had obtained best marks including English, Maths and Hindi. It is his contention that the respondents be directed to accept the said online application and they be restrained from rejecting the application of the petitioners on the ground that they had not filled up the other two subjects. It is their case that they were prevented by the respondents from filling up all the 8 subjects in which they had appeared in the examination. Online form on the portal did not provide for the same. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- UOI submits that the petitioners have passed Madhayma, which is recognized and equivalent to matriculation, but the said information came at a later stage. He submits that now the last date for filling up of the application already expired, but the examination has not yet been held, nor the date for the examination has been finalized. On the issue of filling up of online form by the petitioner, wherein they have filled only six subjects, the counsel for the respondents, after going through the Counter Affidavit, submits that there is nothing in the counter affidavit to suggest as to whether their applications were in order or not. 5. Admittedly, these petitioners had passed Madhayma from Jharkhand Academic Council. The said degree is recognized by the postal services. It is also admitted that in “Madhayma” there are eight subjects for which the examination is conducted. The subject on amongst other includes English, Hindi & Maths. The Postal Department had published an advertisement for filling up the post of -2- Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS). It is also admitted that the online software was so designed so as to accept only six subjects. Because of the said design of the online portal, the petitioners could only fill-up six subjects, though they had appeared in eight subjects in Madhayma. The petitioners now apprehend that as they had filled up best of six subjects and had not filled up the other two subjects, which were included in the examination, their application will be rejected. Their apprehension can be said to be genuine. Since admittedly, there was no option for the petitioners to fill up all their subjects in the online form, they had only filled up best of six subjects, which also include the compulsory subjects of Hindi, English and Maths. There was absolutely no option to fill up the rest of the two subjects as the online form on the portal did not provide nor was there any option for the same. Due to the flaws and/ or designing of the software in the online form in the manner which has been done by the respondents, which prevented the petitioners from filling up all the subjects, which they had appeared in examination, petitioners cannot be put at a disadvantageous situation. Their applications cannot be rejected on that ground. The apprehension is genuine. 6. Thus, I direct the respondent- Postal Department to accept the online form of the petitioners, the same should not be rejected, taking a plea that the petitioners have only filled-up six subjects though they had eights subjects in Madhayma. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 09th October, 2025 R.S./ -3-