As per case facts, petitions challenged a 5 percent relaxation in permissible mistakes for Stenographer recruitment in Phase-2, arguing it contradicted advertisement Clause 22(6)(4) and service rules. Petitioners claimed sufficient ... candidates were available without relaxation, leading to dual benefits for reserved categories and merit list distortion. Respondents justified relaxation based on an administrative circular requiring twice the vacancies for document verification. The court found no record of deliberation for applying the circular or category-wise assessment, and the circular contradicted the statutory rule's upper cap on relaxation. The question arose whether the Board's action of granting an additional 5 percent relaxation in permissible mistakes universally, based on an administrative circular, was legal and consistent with the statutory rules and advertisement conditions, especially when sufficient candidates were already available. Finally, the Court ruled the additional relaxation illegal, quashed the provisional and final merit lists, and directed a fresh merit list. The new list must apply original limits (20 percent for unreserved, 25 percent for SC/ST) and only grant additional 5 percent relaxation where candidates equal to or more than vacancies did not qualify without it in particular categories.