IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-04-2009 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.Nos.29831, 29832 , 30554, 30738 to 30740, 30742 to 30744, 30770, 30771, 30794 to 30796, 30798, 30900 of 2008, 450, 787, 989, 3130 and 3131 of 2009 And W.P.(MD) Nos.11731 and 12390 of 2008, 63 and 231 of 2009 And connected miscellaneous petitions etc. Batch S.SENTHIL KUMAR .. PETITIONER WP NO.29831/2008: R. GOVINDASAMY ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.29832/2008 K. DHAKSHINAMURTHI ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30554/2008 K. RAMESH KUMAR ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30738/2008 S. RAMESH ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30739/2008 P. MAHALAKSHMI ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30740/2008 M. SENTHIL KUMAR ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30742 & 30743/2008 K. DEVARAJAN ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30744/2008 1. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN 2. V. KARTHIKEYAN 3. M. SELVARAJ 4. C. SANGU 5. V. ARIVUKANNAN ..PETITIONERS IN WP.NO.30770 & 30771/2008 P.V. VIJEYA KARTHIK RAJ ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30794/2008 M.A. RAVI VARMA ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30795/2008 S. SENTHIL KUMAR ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30796/2008 K. RAMYA ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30798/2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ S. JANAKIRAMAN ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.30900/2008 1. M. CHANDRASEKARAN 2. K.N. SAKTHIVEL 3. T.ARASU 4. K. SENTHILNATHAN 5. P. USHA 6. M. SANDHANAM 7. R. DEVARAJ 8. M. VENKATESH ..PETITIONERS IN WP.NO.450/2009 1. A. NATARAJAN 2. P. GUNASEKARAN 3. S. PANNERSELVAM 4. K.R. BALAJI ..PETITIONERS IN WP.NO.787/2009 D. GANESH BABU ..PETITIONERS IN WP.NO.989/2009 P.V. VIJEYA KARTHIK RAJ ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.3130/2009 M.A. RAVI VARMA ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.3131/2009 1. R. GANESAN ..PETITIONERS IN 2. L. NAGARAJAN WP.NO.11731/2008 3. A. MUTHUPANDI P. SUBRAMANIAN ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.12390/2008 N. SURESH ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.63/2009 S. JOHN KENNEDY ..PETITIONER IN WP.NO.231/2009 vs. 1.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai-2. Respondent in WP.29831, 29832, 30554, 30738 to 30740, 30742 & 30743, 30744, 30770, 30771/08, 30794 to 30796/08, 30798/08, 30900/08, 450, 787/09, 989, 3130/09, 3131/09, 12390/08, 63/09, 231/09. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU ..FIRST RESPONDENT IN REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY WP.NO.450/2009 2ND SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI-9. RESPONDENT IN WP.NO. 750/2009 & WP.NO. 787/2009 1. STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI-9. 2. THE TAMIL NADU PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REP. BY CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, GOVERNMENT ESTATE, CHENNAI-2. ..RESPONDENTS IN WP.NO.11731/2009 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, TAMIL NADU PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ..2ND RESPONDENT IN CHENNAI-2. WP.NO.12390/2008 Prayer in WP.29831 & 29832/2008 : Petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to re-evaluate the petitioner's main answer papers in the Group-I Services Main Examination conducted by the respondent on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008 by comparing the same with the last 3 candidates selected in each category. PRAYER: W.P.No.30554/2008: Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to cancel the results of the main examination for Group I Services for the year 2006-2007 held on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 and declare the same only after complying with the directions of this Court dated 13.08.2008 in WP.No.18780/2008 and after proper evaluation and to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to Group-I Service in accordance with the Advertisement/No.120 dated 01.08.2007 issued by the respondent for filing up the Group-I Posts, award costs W.P.No.30738 of 2008 Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to cancel the results of the main examination in Group I Examination 2006-2007 conducted by the respondent on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 due to incompetent valuation and unfair practice and consequently to conduct fresh main examination for the same. W.P.No.30739 of 2008 Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to cancel the results of the Main Examination in Group I Examination 2006-2007 conducted by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the respondent on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 due to incompetent valuation and unfair practice and consequently to conduct fresh Main Examination for the same. W.P.No.30740 of 2008 Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to cancel the results of the Main Examination in Group I Examination 2006-2007 conducted by the respondent on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 without constituting the Expert Committee consequently to conduct fresh Main Examination for the same based on the findings of the Expert committee constituted as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court on 13.08.2008 in W.P.Nos 19121 of 2008 batch. W.P.No.30742 of 2008 Writ in the nature of DECLARATION declaring the action of the respondent in not constituting the Expert Committee as directed by this Hon'ble Court on 14.08.2008 in WP.No.18888 of 2008 batch for verifying the discrepancies of Wrong Key answers that has crept in to the preliminary examination dated 23.12.2007 and announcing the results of the Main Examination conducted on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 without adhering to the above, as illegal, arbitrary, malafide and vindictive. W.P.No.30743/08 Writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent to cancel the results of the Main Examination in Group I Examination 2006- 2007 conducted by the respondent on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 without constituting the Expert committee, consequently to conduct fresh Main Examination for the same based on the findings of the Expert Committee constituted as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court on 13.08.2008 in WP.No.18888 of 2008 batch. W.P.No.30744/08 Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of Writ, directing the respondent, to allow the petitioner to participate in the personal interview being conducted in pursuance of Group-I TNPSC Examination for the year 2006-2007. W.P.No.30770 of 2008 Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to cancel the results of the Main Examination in Group-I Examination 2006- 2007 conducted by the respondent on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 without constituting the Expert Committee, consequently to conduct fresh Main Examination for the same based on the findings of the Expert Committee constituted as per the directions of this Hon'ble court on 13.8.2008 in W.P. Nos. 18888 of 2008 batch. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.NO.30771 of 2008 Writ in the nature of DECLARATION declaring the action of the respondent in not constituting the Expert Committee as directed by this Hon'ble court on 13.08.2008 in W.P. No.18888 of 2008 batch for verifying the discrepancies of wrong key answers that has crept in to the preliminary examination dated 23.12.2007 and announcing the results of the Main Examination conducted on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 without adhering to the above, as illegal, arbitrary, malafide and vindictive. W.P.No.30794 of 2008 Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the provisional list of selected candidates for the ORAL TEST for Group-I Services 2006-2007 issued by the 1st respondent published in Internet and quash the same and consequentially direct the 1st Respondent to publish results of the petitioner in Group-I Preliminary Examination 2006-2007 as per the Hon'ble High court Order in W.P. 12127/08 dated 31.7.2008 enable the petitioner participate in the further Selection process. W.P.No.30795 of 2008 Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the provisional list of selected candidates for the ORAL TEST for Group-I services 2006-2007 issued by the 1st respondent published in Internet and quash the same and consequentially direct the 1st Respondent to publish results of the petitioner in Group-I Preliminary Examination 2006-2007 as per the Hon'ble High Court order in W.P.12127/08 dated 31.7.2008 enable the petitioner participate in the further selection process. W.P.NO.30796 OF 2008 WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS call for the records relating to the provisional list of selected candidates for the ORAL TEST for group I services 2006-2007 issued by the ist respondent published in Internet and quash the same and consequentially direct the ist respondent to publish results of the petitioner in Group I preliminary examination 2006-2007 as per the dirctions at Honourbale High court as on 12127/08 dated 31.7.2008. W.P.No.30798/2008 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or order or direction, directing the respondent to release the cut off marks of the petitioner along with the marks obtained by the petitioner in Group I main Examination. W.P.No.30900/2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ to issue appropriate Writs, Orders or Directions and in particular a WRIT in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondent to cancel the results of the main examination in Group I examination 2006- 2007 conducted by the respondent on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008 without constituting the Expert Committee, consequently to conduct fresh main examination for the same based on the findings of the Expert Committee constituted as per the directions of this Honourable court on 13.8.2008 in W.P. Nos. 19243 of 2008 batch W.P.NO.450/2009 WRIT in the nature of CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS calling for all relevant records regarding the selection process involved in the impugned selected list for oral test dated 08.12.2008 published in the official websit by the respondent in the Group - I Examination 2006-2007 herein to quash the same as arbitrary, improper, illegal against the rules and procedures of the 1st respondent, thereby directing the 1st respondent to cancel the results of the Main Examination in Group - I Examination 2006-2007 conducted on 16.08.2008 and 17.08.2008 and consequently conduct fresh Main Examination for the same. W.P.No.787/09 WRIT in the nature of CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS calling for all relevant records regarding the selection process involved in the impugend selected list for oral test dated 08.12.2008 published by the 1st respondent in their official website in the Group I Examination 2006-07 herein to quash the same as arbitrary improper, illegal against the rules and procedures of the first respondent, thereby directing the first respondent to cancel the results of the main examination in group I examination 2006-2007 conducted on 16- 08-2008 and 17-08-2008 and consequetnly conduct fresh main examination for the same. W.P.NO.989/2009 to issue appropriate Writs, Orders or Directions and in particular a WRIT in the nature of DECLARATION declaring the Notification for the Group I Examination 2006-2007 dt 1.8.2007 and the selection process of the said Group I examination as arbitrary, illegal, unlawful and malafide W.P.3130/2009 WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the relating to the results of Group -I preliminary Examination 2006-2007 conducted by the respondent published on 25.4.2008 and all further proceedings in furtherance of the notification dated 01.08.2007 inviting application for the direct recruitment to the vacancies for the posts included in the Group -1 services excaminations 2006-2007 and quash the same as improper, illegal and unconstitutional and consequetially direct the respondent to conduct the Group I preliminary Exdamination 2006-2007 afresh in accordance with law https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.3131/2009 WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the relating to the results of Group -I preliminary EXamination 2006-2007 conducted by the respondent published on 25.4.2008 and all further proceedings in furtherance of the notification dated 01.08.2007 inviting application for the direct recruitment to the vacancies for the posts included in the Group -1 services excaminations 2006-2007 and quash the same as improper, illegal and unconstitutional and consequentially direct the respondent to conduct the Group I preliminary Exdamination 2006-2007 afresh in accordance with law W.P.No.11731/08 WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS calling for the records relating to the list of registered numbers of candidates who have been admitted provisionally to the oral test for appointment by direct recruitment to the posts included in Group I Service for the year 2006-2007 based on the results of the main written examination conducted by the second respondent commission on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008 issued by the second respondent dated nil and published in website on 8.12.2008 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to redo the evaluation exercise of the results of preliminary examination held on 23.12.2007 for appointment by direct recruitment to the posts included in Group I services 2006-2007 W.P.No.12390/2008 to issue an order, or a direction or a Writ, particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to reevaluate petitioner's answer scripts vide register No.00175286 pertaining to the recruitment to the posts included in Group-I services 2006-2007 and consequently publish his result W.P.NO.63/2009 WRIT OF MANDAMUS directing the respondent to produce the answer papers of the petitioner (Registration No.01027256) in respect of the main written examination held on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008 for direct recruitment to the post included in Group I service 2006- 2007 for being compared with that of any answer papers of any other candidates selected for interview W.P.NO.231/2009 WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ, Order of Direction in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to direct the respondent to publish marks of the petitioner for the Group-I Main Examination https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ held on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008 and consequently direct the respondent to conduct interview for the petitioner if he secured eligible cut of marks in the group-I main exam. W.P.NO.30554/2009 to issue appropriate Writs, Orders or Directions and in particular issue a Writ in the nature of MANDAMUS directing the respondent to cancel the results of the main written examination for Group I services for the year 2006-2007 held on 16-8-08 and 17-8-08 and declare the same only after complying with the directions of this honourable court dt. 13-8-2008 in WP NO. 18780 of 2008 and after proper evaluation and consequently consider the case of the petitoner for appointment to Group I services in accordance with the Advertisement No. 120 dt. 1-08-2007 issued by the respondent for filling up the Group I posts, award costs. W.P.NO.30794/2008 & 30796/2008 : Mr.K.Venkatramani, S.C for M/S.R.Siva Kumar for Petitioner : Mr.V.T.Gopalan,S.C for M/S.C.N.G.Ezhilarasi(TNPSC) for Respondent W.P.NO.29831/2008 & 29832/08 : Mr.Vijay Narayan for Mr.P.K.Rajesh Praveen Kumar for Petitioner W.P.NO.30742 to 30743 : Mr.D.Chandrasekar for Petitioner W.P.NO.30744/2008 : Dr.Krishnamoorthy for Petitioner W.P.No.30554/2008 : Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar for Row and Reddy for Petitioner W.P.NO.30770 & W.P.No.30771/2008 :Mr.N.G.R.Prasad,S.C for Mr.P.K.Rajesh Praveen Kumar for Petitioner W.P.No.30798/2008 :Mr.V.Bhiman for Petitioner W.P.No.30900/2008 & W.P.No.30738/2008 , W.P.787/2009 :Mr.P.K.Rajesh Praveen Kumar for Petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.NO.450/2009 :Mr.T.R.Rajagopalan, S.C for Mr.P.K.Rajesh Praveen Kumar W.P.No.989/2009 : Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan,S.C. for Mr.P.K.Rajesh Praveen Kumar. W.P.NO.11731/2008(MD) & w.p.No.63/2009 (MD) :Mr.G.R.Swaminathan for Petitioner W.P.No.12390/2008(MD) :Mr.S.R.Venkateswaran for Petitioner W.P.No.231/2009 :Mr.V.T.Balaji for Petitioner W.P.No.3130/2009 & W.P.No.3131/2009 :Mr.R.Shiva Kumar for Petitioner M.P.No.1/2009 IN W.P.No.29831/2008 :Mr.C.Selvaraj,S.C for Mr.S.Mani for implead Petitioners M.P.No.3 &6/2009 IN\ W.P.No.989/2009 :Mr.A.L.Somayaji, S.C for Mr.Satish Parasaran for impleaded Petitioner COMMON ORDER Since Group-I Services in the State of Tamil Nadu provide a short cut for entry into All India Services (IAS, IPS etc.), every selection to Group-I Services, has always been bogged down by litigation and the batch of cases on hand is one such. But unfortunately, it is a second round of litigation in respect of the same selection, for reasons mainly attributable to persons who set the question papers for the preliminary examination. 2. I have heard Mr.N.G.R.Prasad, Mr.Vijay Narayan, Mr,T.R. Rajagopalan, Mr. AR.L.Sundaresan, Mr.K.Venkataramani and Dr.G. Krishnamurthy, learned Senior counsel/Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.V.T.Gopalan and Mr.N.R.Chandran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Tamilnadu Public Service Commission, and Mr.AL.Somayaji and Mr.C.Selvaraju, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the some candidates who have filed impleading petitions. 3. By a notification published on 1.8.2007, the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (Respondent) invited applications from eligible candidates for direct recruitment to 172 posts included in Group-I Services of the State of Tamil Nadu, for the year 2006- 2007. The process of selection comprised of (i) a preliminary examination for selecting candidates for admission to the main https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ examination (ii) a main written examination and (iii) an oral interview. 4. A total of 85,913 candidates are said to have applied in response to the notification and the preliminary examination was held at various centres in the State on 23.12.2007. On 25.4.2008, the results of the preliminary examination were declared and out of those candidates who appeared for the preliminary examination, 1,796 candidates were declared successful for admission to the main written examination. This represented 10 times the total number of posts sought to be filled up. 5. Immediately after the announcement of the results of the preliminary examination, a batch of 31 writ petitions came to be filed by some unsuccessful candidates, contending that there were serious mistakes in some of the questions and/or in the key answers to those questions. By a judgment dated 31.7.2008, Justice N.Paul Vasantha Kumar, disposed of the batch of writ petitions W.P.Nos.12127 of 2008 etc., with the following directions:- "18. In the light of the above findings and having regard to the judgments cited supra, I am inclined to pass the following orders: (i) The petitioners herein are directed to submit representation pointing out the number of questions where the questions are not correctly asked, more number of answers are found correct as per leading text books and whether key answer to the questions are correctly given on or before 7.8.2008. (ii) On receiving the said representations the respondent/TNPSC is directed to place the disputed questions/answers before the Expert Committee to be constituted by it for verification as to whether the questions pointed out are correct, if more than one answer given in the choice are correct and whether the key answers given to any question pointed out by the petitioners are wrong. (iii) On verifying the same, the Expert Committee is directed to award marks to such of those petitioners who attempted the said questions and on that basis determine the final marks of the petitioners in the preliminary examination. (iv) Since the above said exercise will take sometime and in view of fixation of date for the main written examination as 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008, the respondent/TNPSC is directed to permit the petitioners herein to write the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ main written examinations along with 1750 candidates, who are already found eligible to write main written examination. (v) By following the above process, if the petitioners are getting the required cut-off marks prescribed for the respective category, their final written examination papers shall be valued. If the petitioners are not getting the required cut-off marks, their final written examination papers need not be valued. (vi) Since the preliminary examination results were published as early as on 25.4.2008, and the main written examination is to be held on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008, the benefit of this order is restricted to the writ petitioners herein, as no general directions could be issued at this belated stage. All the writ petitions are ordered accordingly. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed." 6. Following the above judgment, rendered on 31.7.2008, another writ petition filed on the same day viz., 31.7.2008 was allowed by the learned Judge, on 8.8.2008. But in the meantime, another group of 76 persons filed 77 writ petitions in W.P.Nos.18714 of 2008 etc., seeking identical reliefs. This batch of petitions was opposed by the Service Commission on the ground that as per the earlier order dated 31.7.2008, the benefits of the order were restricted only to the writ petitioners in the first batch. But the said objection was over ruled and the second batch of writ petitions were disposed of by Justice P.Jothimani by a common order passed on 13.8.2008. The operative portion of the said order in paragraph-17 reads as follows:- "17. For the reasons stated, the above writ petitions stand disposed of with the following directions: (i) The respondent, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, shall permit the petitioners herein to write final examinations to be conducted on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008 in various centres at Chennai by issuing Hall Tickets to them. As submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, the petitioners are entitled to collect their respective Hall Tickets from the Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai, in its Office on or before 5.00 p.m., on 14.8.2008. It is made clear that allowing the petitioners to write the examination does not mean that their rights to appear for final examination are recognised by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (ii) The answer papers of final examinations to be taken by the petitioners as per the above said direction shall be kept separately in a sealed cover by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission without referring for valuation. (iii) All the petitioners before this Court are permitted to make individual representation to the respondent, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, bringing out the specific instances of mistake ascertained by them in the question papers or in the key answers, provided such questions are attended by the petitioners concerned. They must also disclose their names, addresses, register numbers, question numbers, question booklet series, the Writ Petition Numbers, the genuine doubt about their key answers etc., in the representation. Such representations shall be submitted by the petitioners to the Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, in its Office on or before 5.00 p.m., on 14.8.2008. As fairly submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent Public Service Commission, on submission of such representation by individual petitioners, the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission shall acknowledge the receipt of such objections by making proper endorsement. (iv) On receipt of the said representations, the respondent Service Commission shall place the entire issue before the Experts Committee to be constituted by it for verification by comparing the necessary papers of the concerned petitioners and to arrive at a final decision about its correctness or otherwise. In the event of the Experts appointed by the respondent Service Commission deciding that the questions attempted by the individual petitioner are either wrong or some mistakes have crept in, the respondent Service Commission shall grant necessary marks to the concerned petitioners. (v) After completion of the above said exercise, the respondent Service Commission shall decide about the petitioners entitlement or eligibility of the petitioners to write the final written examination based on the cut off mark issued by the Service Commission and thereafter, the Service Commission shall direct valuation of the final examination papers of those petitioners alone. With regard to the petitioners, who are not able to get the required cut off mark, after the exercise made by the Service Commission as stated above, their final written examination papers need not be valued and the said factum shall be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ published by the Service Commission in its usual manner. (vi) It is made clear that the decision of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission after referring to the Experts opinion shall be final, however subject to any legal remedy, which may be available to the petitioners. All other rights of Public Service Commission as per the Notification issued by them shall continue to be operative. It is made clear that if the petitioners do not appear before the respondent Service Commission by the time stipulated for submitting their objections and receiving Hall Tickets, they are not entitled for the benefits given in this order." 7. Based on the above order passed on 13.8.2008, in the group of 77 writ petitions, 12 more writ petitions came to be allowed on 14.8.2008 and 5 writ petitions came to be allowed in the Madurai Bench of this Court, following these orders. Thus a total of 126 writ petitions, filed by 125 candidates (one candidate filed two writ petitions) were covered by the aforesaid directions passed by the two learned Judges. 8. As a result of the orders passed in the above batches of writ petitions, 125 candidates who were the writ petitioners in those batches of writ petitions, were permitted to write the main written examination, along with the 1,796 candidates originally declared successful. All of them wrote the main written examination on 16.8.2008 and 17.8.2008. 9. As per the directions issued in the above batches of cases, the Service Commission constituted a Committee of 23 Experts and the petitioners in the above batches of cases submitted representations to them, pointing out the questions and/or answers disputed by them. The Expert Committee examined these disputed questions, about 40 in number, finalised the correct answers, compared those correct answers with the original key answers, with which the Service Commission originally made the evaluation. In this process, some of those 125 writ petitioners gained extra marks and some of them lost even the original tally. 10. Finally, the Expert Committee found that out of 125 writ petitioners, who filed the previous batches of writ petitions, only 25 candidates secured the cut off marks, after revaluation, to be eligible for admission to the main written examination. Consequently, the Service Commission sent for evaluation, the answer papers of only these 25 out of 125 candidates, in the main written examination. 11. After evaluating the answer papers of these 25 candidates, in the main written examination, apart from evaluating the answer papers of the originally qualified 1,796 candidates, the Service https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Commission declared the results of the main