H.N. Nagamohan Das, J.—Petitioners in all these writ petitions are unsuccessful candidates in the main examination conducted by the respondents for recruitment of Civil Judges. Respondents are common in all these writ petitions. Different prayers are made in different writ petitions. The sum and substance of the prayers in all these writ petitions is as under:

(i) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to re-total the marks secured by the petitioners;

(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to furnish Xerox copies of answer scripts written by the petitioners;

(iii) For a writ of mandamus to revalue the answer scripts of the petitioners in failed subjects in terms of the representations given by them;

(iv) To quash the entire process of conducting the main written examination insofar as petitioners are concerned on the ground that Kannada question papers are not furnished;

(v) To quash the main examination of Law Paper II under the heading "Frame proper and necessary issues with the following pleadings" assigned 25 marks and to direct to issue fresh question paper to that extent.

Respondents issued notification on 6-8-2011 inviting applications from eligible candidates to fill 152 posts of Civil Judges. This notification further specifies that there will be a preliminary examination followed by main examination and thereafter viva voce. Petitioners and others submitted their applications. On processing the applications intimation was sent to the petitioners and others to appear for preliminary examination on 8-12-2012. Petitioners are successful in the preliminary examination. Thereafter respondents issued intimation calling upon the petitioners and others to appear for the main examination on 13th and 14th of April, 2013. Accordingly, the petitioners and others appeared for the main examination. After valuing the answer scripts, the respondents notified the eligibility list for viva voce in their website on 10-6-2013. To the shock and surprise of the petitioners it was found that they have failed in some of the subjects. In the circumstances, petitioners approached the respondents for retotalling of the marks, to furnish copies of answer scripts and for revaluation. Since the respondents refused to entertain the request of the petitioners, they are before this Court seeking the above mentioned reliefs.

2. Respondent-High Court of Karnataka filed their statement of objections inter alia contending that they have conducted the preliminary examination and the main examination strictly in terms of provisions of the Karnataka Judicial Service (Recruitment) (Amendment) Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). Even the valuation and totaling of answer scripts of petitioners and others are strictly done in terms of the Rules and there are no lapses or illegalities. The Rules do not provide for retotalling, providing Xerox copies of answer scripts and revaluation. The setting up of question papers is in accordance with the Rules and there are no illegalities. Furnishing of question papers in Kannada language is not mandatory and the same has not resulted in any inconvenience or loss to the petitioners. Therefore the respondents pray for dismissal of writ petitions.

3. Heard arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ papers.

On Prayer (i)

4. On 25-7-2013 learned Counsel for the respondent-Registrar General made a submission and this Court passed an order as under:

Sri. D.M. Nanjunda Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-Registrar General submits that in the event of any of the petitioners applying for re-totalling, then they will re-total their answer sheets and issue necessary endorsement. Submission of the learned Senior Counsel is placed on record. Petitioners who are interested may apply for re-totalling to the respondent-Registrar General. The Registrar General is hereby directed to consider the applications, re-total the answer sheets of the respective petitioners a