In all the above writ petitions, the issue involved relates to the selection of candidates for Group-I Services by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) for the year 2000-01, the result of which was published on 28. 2004. W.P.No.30885 of 2004 has been filed by one A.B. Natarajan, who appeared for Group I Examinations, having been selected in the preliminary examinations held in 2001 and in the main examinations held in February, 2002, declared as not selected in the oral test conducted between 26. 2004 to 26. 2004 by the TNPSC, challenging the selection as published on 28. 2004. He has subsequently filed WP.M.P.No.218 of 2007 for impleading one of the selected candidates viz., T.Jayaseelan and the said petition was ordered on 12. 2007. Then, he impleaded other selected candidates as respondents 3 to 92 as per order passed in WP.M.P.No.789 of 2008 dated 24. 2008. As per the direction of Court, he served notice on the respondents 3 to 92 privately out of whom respondents 2, 4 to 6, 11, 14, 16 to 18, 20, 21, 23, 27, 33 to 36, 39, 43, 44, 46, 51 to 55, 57, 61 to 64,67 to 70, 73 to 75, 78,79, 90 and 91 were served and proof of affidavits were filed. However, in respect of remaining respondents, the covers were returned.

2. Subsequently, by order passed in WP.M.P.187 of 2009 dated 16. 2009, the prayer in the writ petition was amended to challenge the abovesaid selection as published in the Tamil daily, Daily Thanthi dated 28. 2004 and to direct the first respondent, TNPSC to redraw the selection list in accordance with law and to consider the name of petitioner for selection and to appoint him.

3. The respondents 2 to 92, the selected candidates, who have been served have not chosen to appear.

4. W.P.No.19851 of 2004 has been filed by 13 unselected candidates in the said Group-I examinations.

5. Likewise, W.P.No.17969 of 2004 has been filed by another batch of 18 unselected candidates challenging the selection and the prayer in the said writ petition was subsequently amended as per order in WP.M.P.No.2202 of 2007 dated 10. 2007 to challenge the selection and for direction to the respondent to consider the petitioners claim for appointment in Group-I Services. Out of the said 18 petitioners, except the first petitioner S.Madhavan, all other petitioners have chosen to withdraw from the said writ petition which was ordered by this Court on 30.8.2007 and the writ petition was dismissed in respect of petitioners 2 to 18 and hence, the first petitioner S.Madhavan, alone is maintaining the said writ petition.

6. The said S.Madhavan has subsequently filed another writ petition in W.P.No.482 of 2005 impleading the Union of India represented by the Central Bureau of Investigation/Special Police Establishment, New Delhi, as 4th respondent for a Mandamus directing the said 4th respondent to comprehensively investigate into the alleged massive corruption and fraud in the examinations and recruitment conducted by the TNPSC over the past decade since the introduction of multiple subject system and to set aside the selection effected by the third respondent, TNPSC over the past decade, in the light of the views expressed by the Honble Supreme Court in Krishan Singh vs. State of Haryana [(1994) 4 SCC 165].

7. In all the above said writ petitions, of course, except the last one viz., W.P.No.4508 of 2008, as it is earlier stated, Group I examinations conducted by the TNPSC for the year 2000-01 for which final results were published on 28. 2004 in newspapers are challenged mainly on the ground that scaling technic followed by the TNPSC for the purpose of valuation and selection is not proper, that the candidates who were selected have committed breach of certain instructions issued by the TNPSC regarding the use of sketch pens, colour pencils, etc. and that while transferring marks from the mark statements to mark sheets, mistakes have been committed by the staff of the TNPSC. The petitioners have also alleged irregularities