1. Delivery of judgment on this writ petition has been sufficiently delayed, but not without a cause. In course of hearing, my attention was drawn by Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate for the respondents 9 to 12 (hereafter the private respondents) to a decision of the Supreme Court reported in (2012) 8 SCC 748 (Jainendra Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.). A Division Bench of two Hon’ble Judges of the Supreme Court considered 13 (thirteen) previous decisions, and expressed the view that the question of application of different yardsticks in the matter of grant of relief to candidates who have deliberately suppressed information at the time of recruitment ought to be dealt with by a larger Bench of the Supreme Court. With that in view, the matter (a civil appeal) was referred for consideration by a larger Bench. The judgment on this writ petition was kept pending, awaiting a decision on the reference. However, to the best of my knowledge, the reference is yet to be decided. I, thus, propose to decide the writ petition considering the authorities that have been cited before me.

2. Pursuant to an advertisement published on July 14, 2006, the 5 (five) petitioners had of