Madhuresh Prasad, J.—These two writ petitions are raising identical issues in respect of the same procedure in relation to 67th Combined Preliminary Competitive Re-Examination (for short ‘the Preliminary Examination’). The learned counsels have, thus, submitted that the matter may be considered together.

2. Mr. Y.V.Giri, learned senior counsel, represents the petitioners in CWJC No. 17803 of 2022, whereas the petitioner of CWJC No. 17806 of 2022 is represented by learned counsel Mr. Suresh Kumar Ishwar. The respective learned counsels for State and BPSC have also made submission. The relief claimed by the parties in both the writ petitions are substantially based on a criticism of the answer key based on which result of the Preliminary Examination has been declared.

3. In brief, the sequence of events leading to lodging of the instant cases and which are not in dispute is that Advertisement for the Examination was published on 24-09-2021. The Preliminary Examination consisting of Multiple Choice Questions (‘MCQ’ for short) was conducted on 30-09-2022. The petitioners participated in this examination. Immediately, after the examination, i.e. on 01.10.2022, the Respondent-Commission came out with a provisional answer key, containing model answers to the questions asked in the Preliminary Examination. This provisional answer key was published along with an “Important Notice” (Annexure-3 in CWJC No. 17803 of 2022), on the same day, allowing an opportunity to the appeared candidates, which includes the petitioners to raise an objection with respect to any of the provisional answers, but with reference to authentic source/material. The objection was to be submitted on the “objection form” prescribed in the notice, giving name and other details of the appearing candidate, through speed post, so as to reach the office of the Commission on or before 5 P.M. on 12.10.2022. The notice further contained a clear stipulation that objections received after the date and time specified will not be considered. The objections received on the form were to be subjected to a detailed examination by a Committee of subject Experts. After such consideration, the final answer key was to be prepared by the Committee, based on which the OMR answer sheet(s) were to be evaluated.

Re. : Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17803 of 2022)

4. These petitioners admittedly, have not filed any objection to the provisional model answers. The impugned final answer key along with the result of the Preliminary Examination has been published on 17.11.2022. Thereafter, respondent-Commission on 25.11.2022 has notified the schedule of the 67th Combined main (Written) Competitive Examination (for short ‘the Mains Examination’) to be conducted between 29.12.2022 to 31.12.2022. Only those candidates who had emerged successful at the Preliminary Examination and whose names figured in the result published on 17.11.2022, were allowed to appear for this Mains examination, as per the terms of Advertisement.

5. Immediately, one day after publication of the dates for the Mains Examination, the Commission came out with the additional result dated 26.11.2022. Photo copy of the same is Annexure-6 to the writ petition. From perusal of the same, the reasons necessitating its publication are apparent. The answer key provided an answer choice for one question, which was correct only for Hindi version of the question. The answer choice for English version of the same question was different. Therefore, upon consideration of the objections in this regard, and finding the objection to be correct the Commission took a decision that option “E: would be a valid answer for question booklet of all series. As a result, those candidates who had chosen option “E” as the correct answer were given one mark for this question. 15 candidates across all categories, thus, emerged successful, within the earlier determined cut-off marks. It is these 15 candidates whose results have been notified as additional result