HARISH KUMAR, J.:–We have heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioners in all the four writ petitions, Mr. Nasrul Hoda Khan, learned Advocate for the State, Mr. Piyush Lall, learned Advocate for the Patna High Court and Mr. Satyabir Bharti, learned Advocate for the Bihar Public Service Commission.

2. Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions is one and the identical, the same are being heard together and disposed of by this common order/ judgment.

3. The core question for consideration as depicted by the petitioners, who were the aspirants of 30th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examination, is as to whether in absence of any provision of disqualifying any candidate in interview under the Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Amendment Rules, 2016, the Advertisement No. 06 of 2018 issued thereunder, providing minimum Bench mark of 35 per cent in interview and thereby disqualifying large number of candidates, including the petitioners, could be held to be justified and sustainable in law.

4. The brief history of the case is that the petitioners having found themselves eligible, participated in the selection process for the 30th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examination, as had been initiated under the Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules, 1955”) as amended from time to time by the State Government in terms of the decision of the Patna High Court in exercise of powers conferred under Articles 234 and 235 of the Constitution of India.

5. Rules 15 (a), (b) and (c) of Rules, 1955 were initially substituted vide Notification No. 11639A dated 18.09.1959 and the substituted Rule 15(c) provided that “there shall be no qualifying marks for the viva voce test”. Clause 3 of Appendix C thereto provided that viva-voce test shall be of 200 marks, which subsequently was substituted vide notification bearing Memo No. 13546 dated 18.12.2009 providing that the viva-voce test would be of 100 marks. The aforenoted Rule 15(c) of 1955 Rules had further been substituted vide Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Amendment Rules, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Amendment Rules 2014’) as contained in Notification No. 16645 dated 03.12.2014 with the stipulation that ‘there shall be qualifying marks of 35 per cent for the viva voce test’. Be it noted that the aforesaid substitution was in pursuance of the decision of the Full Court of the Patna High Court.

6. The above 1955 Rules was again amended vide Bihar Civil Service (Judicial Branch) (Recruitment) Amendment Rules, 2016, as contained in Notification No. 17283 dated 28.12.2016 in pursuance of the recommendation and decision of Full Court. While incorporating amendment in the earlier Rules, vide Clause 6 of the notification dated 28.12.2016, Rules (a) and (b) of Rule 2015 were substituted but the earlier Rule 15(c) providing for minimum 35 per cent as qualifying marks in viva-voce test was neither substituted nor deleted which caused confusion, leading the petitioners to complain about serious prejudice to their rights and entitlements of being selected for appointment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division).

7. It is the case of the petitioners that though in the 1955 Rules, there was no provision for any cut off marks and subsequently the cut off marks provided for viva-voce test by the amended Rule 2014, the same was deleted by the newly amended Rule, 2016, but surprisingly Advertisement No. 06 of 2018 issued on 21.08.2018 for conducting 30th Bihar Civil Service Competitive Examination, a provision was incorporated that 35 per cent marks out of total 100 marks shall be a cut off/qualifying marks in interview. The petitioners, knowing fully well and having acquainted themselves with the amended Rule, 2016 were under impression that the cut off marks in the advertisement was mistakenly mentioned, as there is no rule providing any cut off marks in interview. Hence they