D.A. DESAI, J.

(1) RESPONDENTS 1,2 and 3 in Civil 357/77 filed writ petition 5462/74 challenging the selection by U. P. public service commission (Commission for short) and subsequent appointment by U. P. State government of appellant and respondent 6 to the post of Professor in Medicine in State (Govermnent Medical Colleges. A learned single judge of tne High court quashed the selections. Four appeals came to be preferred against the judgment quashing selections. Special Appeal 232/75 was filed by Dr. R. N. Tandon, respondent 6; Special Appeal 233 of 1975 was preferred by the present appellant Dr. M. C. Gupta; Special Appeal 264 of 1975 was preferred by the State of U. P.; and Special Appeal 256 of 1975 was filed by respondents 1, 2 and 3 in Civil Appeal 35//77 against that part of the judgment of the learned single judge by which appointment of appellant Dr. M. C. Gupta and respondent 6, Dr. R. N. Tandon, was not quashed.

(2) THE appellate bench partly allowed the appeals and while con- firming the order quashing the selection of Dr. M. C. Gopta and Dr. R, N. Tandon, also quashed their appointment and remitted the matter to the Commission directing it to re-examine the relative merits of all candidates in the light of the interpretation put upon the relevant regulations by the court. Arising from this common judgment, three appeals by special leave are preferred to this court. Civil 357/77 is preferred by Dr. M. C. Gupta and Civil 1142 & 1143 of 1978 are preferred by the State of U. P.

(3) TO focus the attention on the contentions raised at the hearing of these appeals, a brief resume of facts would be advantageous. The Commission invited applications for two posts of Professor of Medicine in the State Medical Colleges as per its advertisement dated 8/09/1973, subsequently extending the last date for receipt of applications to 30/03/1974. Dr. M. C. Gupta and Dr. R. N. Tandon (referred to as the appellants) along with Dr. A. K. Gupta, Dr. Brij Kishore and Dr. S. N. Aggarwal (referred to as respondents 1, 2 and 3), applied for the post. The advertisement set out the prescribed qualifications for the post under Regulations made under S. 33 of the .Indian Medical council Act, 1956 (Act for short). They were in respect of the academic attainments, teaching/research experience, upper age limit, etc. The Commission was assisted by four medical experts in the matter of interview, selection and recommendation of suitable candidates satisfying the requisite qualifications for the post. The Commission selected Dr. M. C. Gupta and Dr. R. N. Tandon for the two posts of Professors in Medicine and recommended their names to the State government. Respondents 1, 2 and 3 who were also candidates for the post, presumably came to know about the recommendation and moved the High court on 13/09/1974 by way of a writ petition questioning the selection. The petition was admitted and role nisi was issued. An ex parte interim Stay restraining the government from making the appointments was granted but subsequently it was vacated. The State government accepted the recommendations of the Commission and appointed Dr. M. C. Gupta and Dr. R. N. Tandon as Professors of Medicine on 30/10/1974. The petition was subsequently amended questioning the order of appointment. As already stated above, the learned single judge held that neither Dr. M. C. Gupta nor Dr. R. N. Tandon had the requisite teaching experience and that neither of them was qualified for selection as Professor of Medicine and accordingly allowed the writ petition and quashed the selection. By a common judg- ment in the appeals arising from the judgment of the learned single judge the appellant bench confirmed the order quashing the selections and further quashed the order of appointment and remitted the matter to the Commission directing it to make fresh selection in consonance with the interpretation put upon the relevant regulations by the court. Three appeals are before