O.P.GARG, J. - (1.) THE U. P. Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') initiated the process to select candidates for appointment to 100 posts of Personal Assistants in U. P. Secretariat and 3 such posts in the Commission by publishing an advertisement dated 28.3.1999. The selection was to be made on the basis of a competitive examination in two subjects, namely. Hindi essay of 100 marks and Hindi steno -typing of 150 marks. There was no prescription for interviewing the candidates and the final selection was to be made on the basis of the total marks obtained in the aforesaid two subjects. The petitioners covered by the above mentioned four writ petitions are the persons whose names did not find place in the result of the successful candidates declared on 3.3.2000. The petitioners have assailed the selection process as being arbitrary and discriminatory. Shorn of all superfluities, the grounds taken by the petitioners to challenge the entire selection process may be categorised under the following three heads : (i) that the selection is against the provisions made in the advertisement and. therefore, the entire process stands vitiated (ii) the method of 'scaling' of marks has been wrongly applied and in any case, it was wrongly applied only in respect of one paper, i.e., Hindi essay, while, if at all, it should have been made applicable in respect of both the subjects, i.e., Hindi essay and steno -typing, and (iii) 34 women candidates have been selected by applying unwarranted reservation though it was not contemplated in the original advertisement.
(2.) IN these writ petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it is prayed that a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus be issued to the respondents firstly, not to give effect to the result in respect of the examination of the year 1999 held for the recruitment to the posts of Personal Assistants as published in the daily Hindi Newspaper 'Amar Ujala' dated 4.3.2000, and secondly, to declare the result of the Personal Assistants Examination, 1999 on the basis of original marks secured by the candidates including the petitioners, without applying 'scaling' system. The selected candidates also appeared to contest the petitions.
(3.) ON behalf of the Commission -respondent No. 1, a counter -affidavit has been filed by Sri G. C. Upadhyay, Section Officer. On behalf of the selected candidates, a counter -affidavit, in the representative capacity, has been filed by one Ram Lal Maurya. The pleas taken in both the set of counter -affidavits are almost identical. It is stated that the selection has been made strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed and that the application of scaling system is a part of the process of selection. It has further been averred that in view of the Government Order dated 26.2.1999, reservation in respect of women candidates was rightly applied. There is also assertion that the Commission was duly bound to implement the policy decision taken by the State Government for reservation in respect of women candidates. Rejoinder affidavit has also been filed.;