Satish Chandra, C.J. - (1.) Four young men have filed this petition. At the hearing, Sri M. Katju their counsel, stated that by now petitioner No. 2 is no longer interested in pressing this petition. It was pressed on behalf of the remaining three.
(2.) The petitioners complain that though they secured more marks in the competitive examination held by the Public Service Commission for appointment of Munsif-Magistrates in this State, yet their names were not recommended for appointment, while many who had secured less marks have been recommended.
(3.) The dispute relates to the recruitment to the post of Munsifs conducted by a competitive examination held by the Public Service Commission. The petitioners appeared for the written examination held in Feb., 1971. They were amongst those candidates who were called up for viva voce examination which was held in Aug. and Sept., 1971. The Public Service Commission in Oct., 1971 recommended 45 candidates for appointment to the post of Munsif-Magistrates. The petitioners were not amongst them, but respondents 3 to 29 were amongst them. In Nov., 1971 the Public Service Commission sent to the Government another list of 33 candidates for appointment. The petitioners name did not appear in this list as well. In May 1974, the Public Service Commission sent to the Government a list of other 37 candidates for appointment but the petitioners failed to find their names in this list as well. Their complaint is that in all the three lists submitted by the Public Service Commission to the Government, there were candidates who had obtained less marks than the petitioners. Still the petitioners were discriminated against, as their names were not sent.;