ORDER :

MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Petitioners, in this batch of petitions, call in question the correctness and validity of the merit list prepared after Preliminary Examination in the matter of selection to the post of Civil Judge Cadre. The petitioners had appeared in Preliminary Examination. After declaration of the result of Preliminary Examination on 11.01.2022 in the matter of recruitment to 120 posts of Civil Judge Cadre, notified vide Advertisement dated 22.07.2021, when model answer keys were published, inviting objections, the petitioners, as claimed by them, submitted objections. A Committee of Experts was constituted to examine various objections. The objections were with regard to either questions itself being vague, incorrect and misleading or answer keys alleged to be incorrect. In some cases, objection was raised that more than one answer keys are correct, yet there were cases where objection was to the effect that none of the answer keys are correct. All these objections were considered by the Committee of Experts constituted by the official respondents. While the Committee decided to delete four questions, objections with regard to other questions were overruled. Aggrieved by deletion of four questions as also rejection of objections with regard to other questions, the petitions have been filed by unsuccessful candidates, which are being disposed off by this common order.

2. The respondents issued an Advertisement on 22.07.2021 under the Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 (As Amended) [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2010’] for direct recruitment to the posts of Civil Judge Cadre. The advertisement invited applications from eligible candidates. Under the Rules of 2010 read with the advertisement, the process of selection compromised of two stages, i.e., Preliminary Examination and Main Examination as specified in Schedule IV appended to the Rules of 2010. The marks obtained in Preliminary Examination by the candidates, declared qualified for admission to Main Examination, were not to be counted for determining their final merit. Under the Rules of 2010 and the advertisement, the number of candidates to be admitted to the main examination was 15 times the total number of vacancies (category wise) to be filled in the year, but in the said range, all those candidates, who secure the same percentage of marks, as may be fixed by the Recruiting Authority for any lower range, were to be admitted to Main Examination. Main Examination comprised of written examination as well as interview. The Rules of 2010 and the advertisement further provided that on the basis of marks secured in Main Examination, candidates to the extent of three times of total number of vancancies (category wise) shall be declared qualified to be called for interview.

3. The petitioners and large number of candidates submitted their applications. All the candidates including the petitioners were screened through Preliminary Examination on the pattern of multiple choice for every question. Preliminary Examination did not comprise of any question requiring writing of answer, but was confined only to options by way of multiple choice. The question papers were prepared in four different sets described as A, B, C and D Series. Preliminary Examination was held on 28.11.2021. Thereafter, provisional answer key/model answer key of question papers of all the series, i.e., A, B, C and D Series was published on 29.11.2021. A notice was published inviting objections from the candidates, who had objections regarding answers mentioned in the model answer key by uploading those objections with the authentic proof, on the official website of the High Court, between the period from 04.12.2021 (from 01:00 P.M.) to 11.12.2021 (up to 05:00 P.M.). It also stated that objections received or submitted after the stipulated period or by any other mode or without paying requisite fee, shall not be entertained. The notice further declared that after due con