"23. The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and found that clear instructions were given in the first page of question booklet directing the candidates to correctly fill up the OMR sheet and any error committed by the candidate cannot be corrected by the authority. The petitioners could not successfully mark the circle/bubble on the answer sheet showing correct registration number, roll number, booklet series or language-II attempted. Consequently, the result of the petitioners have been declared as invalid registration number/roll number. After the declaration of the result in question, they have proceeded to make a request that the correction is required. It is too late in the day to make such request by the petitioners, inasmuch as, OMR sheet is examined by the computer on the basis of columns that have been filled up by an incumbent and, in view of this, once final result has been declared and there is no provision to carry out any correction in the OMR sheet, then no relief can be accorded to the petitioners, especially keeping in view the dictum of Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Arti Verma Vs. State of U.P. & others and the judgment of learned Single Judge in Ritu Chauhan's case (supra), wherein once the Division Bench as well as learned Single Judge had already rejected the similar arguments as well as the claim set up by the candidates appeared in the TET-2013, 2016 and 2017, then there is no reason or occasion for this Court to take a different view in the matter.
