JUDGMENT :

(M.R. Shah, J.)

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) Nos. 949 of 2019, 7893 of 2019 and 10668 of 2022, the original respondents have preferred the present appeals.

2. The facts leading to the present appeals in nutshell are as under:-

2.1 Applications were invited by the High Court of Delhi in the year 2016 to fill up 27 vacant posts of private secretaries. Written examination was held on 04.07.2016, in which 135 candidates appeared. Skill and typing test were held on 05.07.2016 and the result of the written examination was declared on 22.12.2016. Before the declaration of the final merit list, three candidates filed representations seeking rechecking of their answer sheets. The Selection Committee rejected the representations observing that there was no provision for rechecking/re-evaluation of the answer sheets in the Delhi High Court (Appointment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1972. The interviews of the successful candidates were held on 19.01.2017/25.01.2017.

2.2 One Garima Madan obtained copy of her answer sheet and made a representation dated 27.01.2017 requesting the Competent Authority to re-evaluate/recheck certain answers and grant her an opportunity to appear in the interview. Meanwhile, the final merit list pursuant to the written examination and interviews was published and uploaded on the internet on 30.01.2017. Notification was issued by the High Court notifying the appointments made to the post of private secretaries appointing 27 candidates including the original writ petitioners before the High Court. The respondent – Dinesh Kumar was also provided with a copy of his answer sheet pursuant to his application.

2.3 After the declaration of the merit list, few candidates, who had obtained copies of their answer sheets, namely, Ms. Garima Madan; Ms. Sapna Sethi, Mr. Sumit Ghai and Ms. Shitu Nagpal filed representations in the month of February, 2017, seeking re-evaluation of their answer sheets.

2.4 The Writ Petition (C) No. 4260 of 2017 was filed before the High Court by the candidates seeking re-evaluation. By order dated 17.05.2017, the Delhi High Court directed the Acting Chief Justice of the High Court to take an independent decision of reappraisal with respect to the evaluation/marks. A Special Committee was constituted by the Acting Chief Justice on 23.05.2017 to decide the issue pertaining to the evaluation of certain questions in respect of the examination. While these proceedings were ongoing, further representations were filed by candidates for re-evaluation. Total of 13 candidates submitted the representations for re-evaluation. At this stage, it is required to be noted that out of 13 candidates, 05 candidates have already been appointed vide notification dated 02.02.2017 and the remaining 08 as such were not appointed.

2.5 A meeting of the Special Committee was convened on 12.07.2017 and it was decided that an independent examiner would be appointed to carry out re-evaluation which will be limited to 13 candidates as the other candidates have accepted the marks awarded to them. The High Court disposed of the pending writ petitions as the Special Committee recommended re-evaluation of answer sheets. That pursuant to the re-evaluation of the 13 candidates, the marks of all the 13 candidates came to be increased. The High Court disposed of the writ petitions noting that re-evaluation of the answer sheets has been concluded and it was observed that it would be appropriate for the Special Committee to consider the report of the re-evaluation and recommend the further course of action and, thereafter, the result be notified.

2.6 The Special Committee on 12.09.2017 directed copy of re-evaluation results be given to the 13 candidates as also to the already appointed 27 private secretaries. It was further directed that the same be uploaded on the intranet and also displayed on the