JUDGMENT :

Jayant Patel, J.

As in all the matters, the questions are interconnected and common issues arise for consideration pertaining to recruitment for the post of Clerks and Peons in the set up of subordinate courts of Dahod district, they are being considered simultaneously.

2. The short facts of the case appears to be that the advertisement dated 21.06.2005 was published by the Principal District Judge of Dahod District Court (hereinafter referred to as "District Court" for the sake of convenience) inviting applications for the post of Assistant (Junior Clerk), Librarian, Driver, Peon, etc. As per the said advertisement, the requisite age for the post of Assistant (Junior Clerk), Class III was mentioned as not less than 18 years and not more than 25 years on 02.07.2005. There were also other age limits prescribed for different posts, which are not the subject matter of the present proceedings, except that for the post of Peon/Waterman/Jail Warder/Chowkidar, the same age was provided as that for the post of Assistant (Junior Clerk). As per the petitioner of SCA No.29765/07, she applied for the post of Assistant (Junior Clerk). She cleared written test and she was called for interview vide letter dated 14.03.2006 and the interviews were to be held on 27.03.2007. The said petitioner found that her name was not there in the select list and upon further inquiry, she learnt that certain persons, who were appointed purely on adhoc and temporary basis, were also selected. The petitioner further inquired into the matter and found that large number of persons selected were either age barred or they were in relation with other persons working in the set up of District Court and subordinate courts as well as in the other courts of Gujarat State. The petitioner addressed representation to the Hon'ble Chief Justice on administrative side vide letter dated 06.08.2007, but as per the petitioner, as no action was taken, the present petition for challenging the legality and validity of the select list prepared at the recruitment process. The said petitioner has prayed that the select list dated 11.07.2007 be quashed and set aside and it is also prayed that appropriate writ be issued to inquire about the ways and method adopted by the respondents to prepare the list of the candidates eligible to apply for the post of Assistant (Junior Clerk) (hereinafter referred to as "Junior Clerk" for the sake of convenience).

3. In Special Civil Applications No. 29861/07 and 29862/07, the petitioners had applied for the post of Peon in response to the very advertisement and the grievance of the petitioners is that their names appeared in the first select list which was prepared and displayed on the notice board. Thereafter, on the next day, another select list was placed on the notice board wherein the name of the petitioners were deleted. The petitioners have also alleged favouritism and nepotism for certain candidates who as per the petitioners were relatives of the District Judge discharging his duties in Dahod district. The allegation is also made that by ignoring age factor, certain persons were selected on the post of Peon. These petitioners have also made the same prayer as made by the petitioner of Special Civil Application No.29765/07 for quashing and setting aside of the select list for the post of Peon and even inquiry is prayed for the ways and method adopted by the respondents in preparing the list of candidates for the post of Peon. As the names of the petitioners were deleted, they are aggrieved by the said action and hence, the present petitions before this Court.

4. We have heard Mr.R.G. Chaudhary as well as Mr.PM Lakhani, learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners. We have heard Mr.Supehia for the Registrar, High Court as well as for the District Court. We have heard Mr.JF Mehta and Mr. TR Mishra for the concerned respon