( 1 ) THE Convener of the EAMECET-93 is in appeal assailing the judgment of the learned single Judge in favour of the two respondents who had taken the examination but whose answer scripts were not valued for having written their hall-ticket numbers at prohibited places in the answer scripts. Originally the writpetition had been filed by four candidates butat the stage of admission the case of twoof them, P. Sasidharand B. V. Suresh Babu was rejected, the learned single Judge entertained the case of the present respondents and after hearing finally, allowed their case.

( 2 ) SRI T. S. Haranath, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant urges that the two writ petitioners whose case had been rejected by the learned single judge had preferred Writ Appeal No. 1023 of 1993 but that was also dismissed by the Division Bench by judgment delivered on 16-9-1993. The pleas of the two respondents were however allowed taking the view that the roll numbers written at the prohibited places had actually been erased beyond identification and hence could not in any way contribute to the detection of identity of the candidates. It is the submission of Mr. Haranath that specific i