IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 04.11.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P.NOS.4509,4510,4511,4512,4513,4514,4515,4516,4517,4518,7411, 7412,7413,7414,7415,7416,7417,7418,8874,8938,9181,10752,10753, 10754,10755,10756,10757,10758,10759,10760,10761,10762,10763, 10764,11224,11807,12032,12870,13130,13367,13490,13491,13492, 13493,13494,13495,13496,13497,14463,14487,14888,15667,17196, 17197,17198,17472,18226,18227,18228,18229,18230,18231,18232, 18351,18538, 18539, 18659,19469,19470,19471,19472,19473,19510, 19587,19821,20280,20281,20282,20283,20284,20285,20470 OF 2009, 21924,22976 OF 2008 and 15874/09 AND CONNECTED MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS A.Eswaramoorthy Petitioner in W.P.No.4509/2009 G.Venkatesan Petitioner in W.P.No.4510/2009 K.Hemanth Kumar Petitioner in W.P.No.4511/2009 S.Rathinakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.4512/2009 P.Shanmugham Petitioner in W.P.No.4513/2009 S.Thiruvengadam Petitioner in W.P.No.4514/2009 C.Sureshkumar Petitioner in W.P.No.4515/2009 R.Harikrishnan Petitioner in W.P.No.4516/2009 S.Vijaya Petitioner in W.P.No.4517/2009 B.Santhoshkumar Petitioner in W.P.No.4518/2009 C.Shivashankar Petitioner in W.P.No.7411/2009 R.Sundararajan Petitioner in W.P.No.7412/2009 S.Gopi Petitioner in W.P.No.7413/2009 R.Karunagaran Petitioner in W.P.No.7414/2009 A.Sathiyaseelan Petitioner in W.P.No.7415/2009 V.Prabhudoss Petitioner in W.P.No.7416/2009 N.Saravanan Petitioner in W.P.No.7417/2009 M.Sakthikumaran Petitioner in W.P.No.7418/2009 G.Gunasekaran Petitioner in W.P.No.8874/2009 N.Sivakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.8938/2009 R.Alex Petitioner in W.P.No.9181/2009 A.Vijayakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.10752/2009 B.Kumar Petitioner in W.P.No.10753/2009 M.Thillai Govindaraja Perumal Petitioner in W.P.No.10754/2009 M.Mariappan Petitioner in W.P.No.10755/2009 T.Pugazhenthi Petitioner in W.P.No.10756/2009 S.Manoharan Petitioner in W.P.No.10757/2009 B.Sivaraj Petitioner in W.P.No.10758/2009 C.K.Sundaramoorthy Petitioner in W.P.No.10759/2009 P.Natesan Petitioner in W.P.No.10760/2009 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ M.Arulmanimaran Petitioner in W.P.No.10761/2009 M.Balan Petitioner in W.P.No.10762/2009 G.Balamurugan Petitioner in W.P.No.10763/2009 A.G.Chandrasekaran Petitioner in W.P.No.10764/2009 N.Senthilkumar Petitioner in W.P.No.11224/2009 S.Kannan Petitioner in W.P.No.11807/2009 M.Arumugam M.Mariappan G.Sankara Narayanan Petitioner in W.P.No.12032/2009 T.Rajalingam Petitioner in W.P.No.12870/2009 E.Tamilmaran Petitioner in W.P.No.13130/2009 I.Ramachandran Petitioner in W.P.No.13367/2009 M.Suresh Kumar Petitioner in W.P.No.13490/2009 M.Saravanan Petitioner in W.P.No.13491/2009 P.Sivakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.13492/2009 J.Vedamanickam Petitioner in W.P.No.13493/2009 K.Jeeva Petitioner in W.P.No.13494/2009 M.Uma Petitioner in W.P.No.13495/2009 D.Thangamani Petitioner in W.P.No.13496/2009 M.Kesavan Petitioner in W.P.No.13497/2009 M.A.Kamal Mohan Petitioner in W.P.No.14463/2009 V.Udayakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.14487/2009 J.Jayakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.14888/2009 M.P.Murugan Petitioner in W.P.No.15667/2009 R.Ponnusamy Petitioner in W.P.No.17196/2009 C.P.Saravanan Petitioner in W.P.No.17197/2009 M.Packia Raja Petitioner in W.P.No.17198/2009 T.Vanavamalai Petitioner in W.P.No.17472/2009 M.KamalDev Petitioner in W.P.No.18226/2009 J.Arul Prakash Petitioner in W.P.No.18227/2009 S.Giri Petitioner in W.P.No.18228/2009 K.Muniraj Petitioner in W.P.No.18229/2009 G.Ilaiyaraja Petitioner in W.P.No.18230/2009 N.Venkatesan Petitioner in W.P.No.18231/2009 R.Subramanian Petitioner in W.P.No.18232/2009 I.Subburam Petitioner in W.P.No.18351/2009 K.Prabhakaran Petitioner in W.P.No.18538/2009 P.Pon Moses Petitioner in W.P.No.18539/2009 K.Sivakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.18659/2009 S.Sugavanan Petitioner in W.P.No.19469/2009 P.Boopesh Petitioner in W.P.No.19470/2009 A.Kannan Petitioner in W.P.No.19471/2009 V.Gunasekaran Petitioner in W.P.No.19472/2009 I.Shankar Petitioner in W.P.No.19473/2009 S.Thanigasalam Petitioner in W.P.No.19510/2009 K.Subramanian Petitioner in W.P.No.19587/2009 C.Shankar Ganesh Petitioner in W.P.No.19821/2009 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ M.Arunachalam Petitioner in W.P.No.20280/2009 G.Gopinath Petitioner in W.P.No.20281/2009 A.Prince Prabhudoss Petitioner in W.P.No.20282/2009 C.Durai Pandiyan Petitioner in W.P.No.20283/2009 A.Ayyakumar Petitioner in W.P.No.20284/2009 M.Sudalaikannu Petitioner in W.P.No.20285/2009 G.Prakash Petitioner in W.P.No.20470/2009 M/s.Flyways Travels Rep.by its Partner Mr.Majeed Mohammed Yaseen, 7,PNR Layout, Trichy Road, Coimbatore-641 018. Petitioner in W.P.No.21924/2008 M/s.Indian Haj, Organisers Association, Rep.by its Secretary, Chennai-600 084. Petitioner in W.P.No.22976/2008 E.Raj Prabhu Petitioner in W.P.No.15874/2009 Versus 1. The Secretary to Government, Home (Police IV) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009. 1st Respondent in W.P.No.4509 to 4518, 7411 to 7418, 8874, 8938,9181, 10752 to 10764,11224, 12032,12870,11807,13130 13367,13490 to 13497,14463, 14487,14888, 15667,17196 to 17198,17472,18226 to 18232,18351,18538,18539,18659,19469 to 19473,19510,19587,19821,20280 to 20285, 20470,15874 2nd Respondent in W.P. No.19821/09. 2. The Director General of Police Chairman, Tamilnadu uniformed Services, Recruitment Board, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002. 1st Respondent in W.P.No.19821, 2nd Respondent in W.P.No.4509 to 4518, 7411 to 7418, 10752 to 10764,11224, 12032,12870,11807,13130,13367,13490 to 13497,14463,14487,14888,17196 to 17198 17472,18226 to 18232,18351,19821,19587 20280,18538,18659,19469 to 19473,19510 to 20285,20470,15874/09 3rd Respondent in W.P.No.8874,8938, 9181,15667/09 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The Director General of Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-4 3rd Respondent in W.P.No.4509 to 4518, 7411 to 7418/09,10752 to 10764,11224, 12870,11807,13130,13490 to 13497,14463 14487,14888,17196 to 17198,18226, 18232, 18351, 18659,19469 to 19473, 19510,19587,19821,20280 to 20285,20470 15874/09 2nd Respondent in W.P.No.8874,8938, 9181,15667/09 3.Public Information Officer, Superintendent of Police, Tamil Nadu Uniform Services Recruitment Board, Chennai-2 3rd Respondent in W.P.No.13367/09 R.Arjunkumar Sub Inspector of Police, Security Branch CID (Attached with TSP IV Btn Kovaipudur) 4th Respondent in W.P.No.4509/09,11224/09 (R-4 impleaded as per Order dated 10.9.09 in M.P.2/09) 1. The Government of India, Rep.by its Secretary to Government Ministry of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi-110 001. 2. The Joint Secretary to Government (Gulf & Haj) Ministry of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi-110 001. 3. The Deputy Secretary to Government (Haj) Ministry of External Affairs South Block, New Delhi-110 001. 4. The Haj Committee of India (CHC) Rep.by its Chairman, Haj House, 7A-M.R.A.Marg, Palton Road, Mumbai. 5. The Attache (Haj) Ministry of External Affairs South Block, New Delhi-110 001. Respondents in W.P.21924/2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1. Government of India, Rep.by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi. 2. Additional Secretary to Government (Gulf & Haj) Ministry of Exteranl Affairs, South Block, New Delhi. 3. Deputy Secretary to Government, Director of Haj Ministry of External Affairs, Akbar Bhavan, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi. 4. Haj Committee of India (CHC) Rep.by its Chairman /CEO 7A MRA- Marg Mumbai-400 001. Respondents in W.P.22976/2008 Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to add one mark to the petitioner for recruitment of Sub-Inspector of Police (Men and Women-department Quota) 2006 and further direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police under 20% department candidates quota and fix the appropriate place in the selection and grant all consequential service and monetary benefits in W.P.Nos.4509 to 4518/09, 7418/09 Writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent to add one marks in W.P.10754/2009 Two marks in W.P. 7412 to 7417/09 WP 10758/2009, WP 10759/2009; WP 10764/2009; WP 13493/2009; WP 13495/2009; WP 13496/2009; Three marks in WP 7411/2009; WP 7412; WP 10753/2009 WP 10756/2009; WP 17198/2009; WP 19470/2009; WP 19471/2009; WP 19472/2009; WP 19473/2009; WP 19510/2009; WP 20285/2009; Four Marks in WP 19587/2009; to the petitioner for recruitment of Sub Inspector of Police (Men/Women Department Quota) 2006 and further direct the Respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police under 20% department candidates quota and fix the appropriate place in the selection and grant all consequential service and monetary benefits. Writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent one marks in WP 10755, 10762,12870,14463,14888, 18231,19469; to add Two marks in W.P.No.10752/2009; WP.10757/2009; WP 10760/2009;WP 10761/09; WP 11224/2009; WP 13490 to 13492/09 WP 13494/2009; WP 13497/2009; WP 14487/2009; WP 18228/09; WP 18229/2009;to produce OMR Marks statement https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and add the marks in WP 18230/2009; to add the non awarded marks in WP 18351/2009 to produce the OMR marks satement and add 3 marks WP 18659/2009; 20284/09; WP 20470/2009; to the petitioner for recruitment of Sub-Inspector of Police, (Men-80% open Quota 2006 and further direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub Inspector of Police under 80% open candiates Quota and fix the appropriate place in the selection and grant all consequential service and monetary benefits. W.P.No.8874/09, 8938/09:- Writ of Mandamus to direct the 3rd Respondent herein to award One marks to the petitioner Reg.No.1600414 in W.P.8938/09 Two marks to the petitioners Reg.No.1100710 in W.P.8874/09, for selection to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police for the year 2006 and consequently direct the respondents herein to appoint the petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police for the year 2006 and place him in the appropriate place in the list of selected candidates with all consequential service and monetary benefits. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus,directing the Respondents select and appoint the petitioners as Sub Inspector of Police under the Direct Recruitment Quota in W.P.No.12032/2009, W.P.18538/2009,18539/2009, W.P.No.17472/2009. W.P. No.11807/2009: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to accept choice "A" as the correct answer for question No.44 failing under Part A in the Written Examination held for the year 2006-07 for the selection of Sub-inspector of Police, grant one additional mark to the petitioner of the said written examination together with all follow-up orders enabling the petitioner to be appointed to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police by the 3rd respondent on par with the 2006-07 batch mates. W.P.18226/09,18227/09, 15874/09:- A Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to add one mark in W.P.18226 and 18227/09, to the petitioner for the recruitment of sub-Inspector of police (10% wards Quota ) 2006 and further direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub Inspector of police uner 10% wards Quota and fix the appropriate place in the selection and grant all consequential service and monetary benfits. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.No.17196 and 17197/2009: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to add two marks in respect of disputed question and 1 mark for Form-II certificate, and 2 Marks for NSS Certificates to the petitioners for recruitment of Sub-Inspector of Police (Men-department Quota)(Men-80% Open Quota) 2006 and further direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioners as Sub-Inspector of Police under 20% and 80% respectively department and open candidates Quota and fix the appropriate place in the selection and grant all consequential services and monetary benefits. W.P.No.18232/2009: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to modify the selection list in respect of selection conducted to the post of sub inspector in 2006 consequent upon the verfication of marks awarded to the wrong answers and furher direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as sub-Inspector of police Under Department Quota and fix the appropriate place in the selection and monetary benefits. W.P.No.19821/2009 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to add three marks to the petitioners over all total in the process of recruitment of Sub-Inspector of Police-2006 and further direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police within the recruitment under MBC open men category and to fix and appropriate place of seniority in the Taluk Police selection by granting all consequential service and monetary benefits. W.P.No.15667/2009, WP NO.9181/2009: A Writ of mandamus to direct the 3rd Respondent herein to award two marks to the petitioner (Reg.No.1600486) for Question Nos.38 and 44 of the written test in W.P.15667/09 (Respondents herein to award Two additional marks in W.P.9181/09 to the petitioner (Reg.No.2900401) for selection to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police for the year 2006 and consequently direct the respondents herein to post the petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police Taluk Police, taking into account the total marks as 76+2=78 in view of the correct answers in Question numbers 38 and 44 of the written test and place him in the appropriate place of the list of selected candidates with all consequential service and monetary benefits. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.No.13130/2009: A Writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to accept choice A- as the correct answer for question No.44 falling under Part A in the written examination held for the year 2006-2007 for the selection of Sub-Inspector of Police, grant one additional mark to the petitioner for the said written examination together with all follow-up orders enabling the petitioner to be appointed for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police by the 3rd respondent on par with the 2006-07 batch mates for all pruposes within the time frame. W.P.No.13367/2009: A writ of mandamus directing the respondents to rectify the error committed in the written test Sub-Inspectors Recruitment 2006 by awarding 2 additional marks to the petitioner and consequently select and appoint the petitioner as Sub Inspector of Police under the M.B.C category and impart training to the petitioner. W.P.No.21924/2008: Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 12.08.2008 made in No.M/Haj/1183/64/08 passed by the 5th respondent and quash the same consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to allot 100 Pilgrims quota to the petitioner based on its application dated 04.04.2008. W.P.No.22976/2008: Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to allot pilgrims quota to the members of the petitioner association for Haj 2008 on par with the Old Private Tour Operators. For Petitioners in W.P.Nos.4509 to 4518/2009, 7411 to 7418/2009, 17196 to 17198/2009, 14463/2009,14487/2009, 10752 to 10764/2009, 20280 to 20285/2009, 20470/2009 : M/s.S.Sivakumar For Petitioners in W.P.Nos.8874/2009, 8938/2009,9181/2009,15667/2009 : M/s.G.Bala and Daisy For Petitioners in W.P.No.12870/2009, 14888/2009,18659/2009, 18226 to 18232/2009 : Mr.G.Srinivasan For Petitioners in W.P.Nos.11807/2009 & 13130/2009 : Mr.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanaban https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner in W.P.No.13367/2009 : M/s.A.Jenesenan For Petitioners in W.P.Nos.13490 to 13497/2009 : Mr.J.Saravanan For Petitioners in W.P.No.15874/2009, 19469 to 19473/2009,19510/2009 : Mr.K.Venkataramani Senior Counsel for M/s.Mr.Muthappan For Petitioners in W.P.Nos.12032/2009, 17472/2009,18538&18539/2009 : Mr.C.Selvaraju Senior Counsel for Mr.P.Athi Veera Rama Pandian For Petitioner in W.P.No.18351/2009 : M/s.P.I.Thirumoorthy For Petitioner in W.P.No.19587/2009 : M/s.A.R.M.Arunachalam For Petitioner in W.P.No.19821/2009 : M/s.V.Manohar For Petitioners in W.P.Nos.21924&22976/2008: Mr.S.Thirumavalavan For Respondents in all Writ Petitions : Mr.P.S.Raman Advocate General * * * * * C O M M O N O R D E R In view of the common issues involved in all the writ petitions, they have been taken up together for disposal and a common order is passed. 2.The brief facts of the case in a nutshell are as follows: A notification was issued by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board as per the directions of the Government of Tamil Nadu in the newspapers on 18.07.2006 for the recruitment of Sub-Inspector of Police. The Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board has been constituted by the Government of Tamil Nadu for the purpose of recruiting the eligible candidates for various posts in the police department. The notification has been issued for the selection of 682 Sub-Inspector of Police. The selection was for a large number of vacancies since over the years the posts have not been filled up. Out of 682 posts, 517 vacancies have been reserved for direct recruitment and out of the same 445 were meant for men and 72 for women respectively. Two women ST candidates from the backlog vacancies in direct recruitment of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ selection were also included in the list. Of the remaining 146 vacancies which have been earmarked for departmental candidates with the percentage of 20, 126 have been allotted for men and 20 for women. Even in the said category, 17 women candidates in the backlog vacancies coming under various reserved categories were also included. Recruitment process in the above said selection was conducted at 12 Centres throughout the State. The recruitment process consists of Certificate Verification, Physical Measurement Test, Endurance Test, Physical Efficiency Test, Written Test, Viva-voce. A candidate who fails in any one of the above said process is eliminated then and there by issuing a disqualification slip. After the completion of the Physical Efficiency Test, Written Test was held on 20.05.2007. Thereafter, based upon the marks obtained in the Viva-voce as well as the Written Test, candidates have been selected. The appointments have been made from 20.12.2007 onwards. Writ petitions have been filed in the year 2007 by the unsuccessful candidates before the Hon'ble High Court, challenging the provisional selected list and also seeking consideration based upon special sport category and special quota. In the said writ petitions, the grievances of the petitioners therein were that the quota fixed for each category has not been followed, Written Test not conducted properly, ST/SC quota has not been filled up, quota earmarked for the wards of the police personnel not published, there is a lack of transparency in the selection, marks have been awarded in the Sports Certificate and lesser marks have been given to the petitioners in the Viva-voce. The writ petitions have been dismissed by the learned single Judge of the Hon'ble High Court in and by the order dated 20.11.2007 and the writ appeal filed in Writ Appeal No.194 of 2007 etc. were also dismissed by the Hon'ble Division Bench on 28.03.2008. Thereafter from the month of June 2008 onwards, applications have been made by the petitioners at different point of time seeking the particulars of the marks awarded, key answers as well as the copies of the answer sheets written by them. Accordingly, the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board has furnished all the particulars required by the petitioners after taking some time. The petitioners after receiving the said particulars came to understand that marks have been wrongly awarded by selecting wrong key answers as the correct key answers. In other words, the selected candidates who answer some of the questions wrongly have been given marks as against the non-selected candidates who have answered correctly but given the marks wrongly in view of the mistakes committed by the respondents in awarding marks by choosing in correct key answers. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Thereafter, further informations have been sought for by the petitioners from the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board. A reply has been given by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board stating that for question no.11, answer no.D is the correct answer, for question no.38, all the answers are right and question no.44, option-A is the correct answer. The Board has also requested the first respondent to look into the anomaly caused by correcting the answer papers with wrong key answers by providing appointment to the affected candidates. However, the said request was rejected by the first respondent. As per the Written Test, the OMR answer sheets have been evaluated by the computer instead of manual corrections. The candidates were given the choice of shading the correct answers in the OMR answer sheets in pencil. Question No.11 is as follows: 11.Greenhouse effect is caused by A) Oxygen depletion B) Ozone layer depletion C) Hydrogen reduction D) Greenery reduction Question No.38 is as follows: 38.What percentage (%) of human body weight is water ? A) 55 B) 65 C) 70 D) 80 Question No.44 is as follows: 44.Free India's first Governor-General was A) Mountbatten B) Rajaji C) Dr.Zakir Hussain D) Dr.Radhakrishnan The evaluation was made by giving the key answer for question no.11 as Ozone Layer Depletion (B), for question no.38 as 70 (C) and question no.44 as Rajaji (B) respectively. The correct answers which are subsequently given by the Board for question no.11 is (D), question no.38, all the answers and question no.44 is (A). Therefore, there is no dispute regarding the correct answers as per the subsequent communication sent by the Board. In other words, there is an admission by the respondents about the mistakes committed in correcting the answer sheets on the basis of wrong key answers. Thereafter, after obtaining the above said information from the Board under the Right to Information Act, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to include the marks which were wrongly awarded to the petitioners in view of the wrong key answers resulting in wrong https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ evaluation. An application was filed under Rule 2-A of the Appellate- Side Rules and the said application filed in M.P.No.2 of 2009 in W.P.No.4509 of 2009 was ordered permitting to implead the fourth respondent therein as the representative of the selected candidates. 3.Heard Shri.K.Venkataramani, Shri.C.Selvaraj learned senior counsels and Mr.S.Sivakumar, M/s.G.Bala and Daisy, Mr.G.Srinivasan, Mr.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanaban, Mr.A.Jenesenan, Mr.J.Saravanan, Mr.P.I.Thirumoorthy, Mr. A.R.M.Arunachalam, Mr.V.Manohar, Mr.S.Thirumavalavan, learned counsels appearing for the petitioners and Shri.P.S.Raman, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents. 4.The submissions on behalf of the petitioners are as follows: It is submitted by the learned counsels for the petitioners that inasmuch as the respondents having admitted the mistakes in not awarding the marks correctly and awarding the marks wrongly to the selected candidates, as a consequent thereon the said marks should be added to the marks obtained by the petitioners and with the added marks, they should be considered for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police. It is further submitted that the present situation is only because of the respondents and therefore, they cannot take advantage of their own wrong. The petitioners were not aware of the awarding of the wrong marks earlier since they came to know about the facts only in pursuant to the application made by them under the Right to Information Act. Even the question paper has been taken away from the petitioners after the examination was over and therefore, the petitioners were in dark not knowing about the mistakes committed by the respondents. The said mistake having been admitted by the respondents as seen by the letter sent by the Board to the Government dated 30.01.2009 wherein there is an admission by the Board that the question papers were opened only in the printing press and neither the question paper nor the key has been verified, nothing prevented the Board from verifying the same after the examination is over. The Board being a creation of the Government all the respondents are responsible for the mistakes committed by the Board. The learned counsels further submitted that in a case where mistakes were committed by the respondents and because of the same candidates are made to suffer then the said mistakes will have to be made good by rectifying the key answers by awarding marks to the petitioners. It is further submitted that in such a case Supernumerary Posts will have to be created by appointing such of those persons who otherwise would have been selected but for the awarding of the wrong marks. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ In support of the contention that the marks will have to be awarded by creating the Supernumerary Post, the learned senior counsel Shri.C.Selvaraj has relied upon the judgments reported in W.P.NO.18714 OF 2008 etc. DATED 13.08.2008; (2005) 13 SCC 749 [GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY v. SAUMIL GARG AND OTHERS]; (1996) 7 SCC 106 [STATE OF ORISSA v. PRAJNAPARAMITA SAMANTHA]; (1984 ) 2 SCC 319 [ABHIJIT SEN v. STATE OF U.P.]; (1996) 10 SCC 177 [D.K.REDDY v. UNION OF INDIA]; (1997) 11 SCC 488 [DELHI ADMINISTRATION v. NAND LAL PANT]; (1998) 4 SCC 107 [UNION OF INDIA v. AKHILESH CHANDRA AGRAWAL] AND W.P.NO.12127 OF 2008 etc DATED 31.07.2008. Mr.K.Venkataramani, learned senior counsel further submitted that the vacancies have been taken into account as available as on 31.12.2004. If the vacancies available as on the date of the appointment are taken into account, then the contentions raised on behalf of the respondents will fall to the ground since by adopting the said procedure all the persons who are otherwise eligible would have a chance to get appointed. In support of his contention, the learned senior counsel has relied upon the judgment reported in (2002) 10 SCC 549 [SANDEEP SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER] wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased to observe that the vacancies available upto the date of interview should be filled up from among the candidate selected in the competitive test. The said judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court has also been followed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in and by the order DATED 27.04.2007 in W.P.NO.22770 of 2003 etc. Hence, the learned senior counsel submitted that the said procedure will have to be followed in the present case as well. In so far as the contentions raised by the respondents on the ground of constructive res judicata is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsels for the petitioners that the issue raised in the present writ petition has not been raised earlier and therefore, the question of constructive res judicata would not arise for consideration. Further, the other objections regarding delay and laches also liable to be rejected, since the petitioners were not aware of the marks earlier and immediately after getting the information from the respondents, they have filed the present writ petitions. Moreover the fact that the earlier writ petitions have been filed and adjudicated also will have to be taken into consideration in favour of the petitioners in so far as the delay and laches are concerned. Hence, the learned counsels prayed for allowing of the writ petitions. All the learned counsels submitted that they are not seeking to set aside the selection already made and the petitioners are willing to forgo the seniority and they will be satisfied, if they are considered for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police based upon the correct marks being awarded to them. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the second respondent