JUDGMENT :

A.P. Sahi, J.

(Prayer: Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 24.01.2020 made in W.P.No.23670 of 2019 on the file of this Court.)

1. These writ appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 24.01.2020, whereby a learned single Judge has interfered with the selection process of the selections in respect of Motor Vehicles Inspectors Grade-II, the direct recruitment whereof has been held by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, pursuant to an advertisement issued in this regard. The learned single Judge has found that the selection process was vitiated, but in view of the interregnum suggestions given to improve upon the defaults, the process, as suggested in the memo filed by the Transport Commissioner, deserved to be accepted and applied in order to complete the selection process. The learned single Judge has further found that all the 1328 candidates, who had qualified in the written examination should be allowed participation and for that, the scrutiny in respect of 1328 candidates were to be carried out, whereafter oral test would be held. The learned single Judge, therefore, finally evolved a method and disposed of the writ petition with the directions, which are contained in paragraph 44 of the impugned judgment, to finalise the selection process. The learned single Judge, however, found that the select list of the 32 candidates, who had been projected as the only eligible candidates, would stand effaced. Thus, the selections of the 32 candidates were set aside and the entire process from the stage as directed was to be undertaken by the respondents with certain relaxations in the certificate of experience as unfolded later on in the narration.

2. It is those selected candidates whose results have been effaced, in effect quashed, have filed these appeals contending that since they were the only eligible candidates and since no other candidate was found eligible on the scrutiny and verification of certificates, therefore, the selections of these 32 candidates could not have been set aside. It was further urged that the balance of the vacancies still continue to exist and therefore, it was not necessary to set aside the entire selection process, which could have been modified with any direction pertaining to the claim of the unsuccessful candidates. Accordingly, the appeals have been filed praying for setting aside the impugned judgment and for a direction to restore the selections already held insofar as the appellants are concerned.

3. The litigation has a chequered history, in the sense that many intervening orders were passed, which have a direct impact on the entire chronology of events. However, in order to lay down the minimum labyrinth of facts for the purpose of the present controversy, it would be pertinent to mention that these selections are for the post of Motor Vehicles Inspectors Grade II under the Tamil Nadu Transport Subordinate Service. These posts are to be filled up by direct recruitment and the appointing authority of these posts is the Joint Transport Commissioner. The Tamil Nadu Subordinate Service provides for the prescription of qualifications, which is contained in Clause 5(b)(2) thereof. An advertisement was issued being Advertisement No.489, dated 14.02.2018, inviting on-line applications, for filling up 113 vacancies. The advertisement was issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, which indicated that the selection would be comprised of a written examination followed by an oral test to be intervened by the process of certificate verification in respect of the prescribed qualifications. Pursuant to the advertisement, the appellants and the other candidates applied, for which the written examination was conducted on 10.06.2018. The certificates of driving experience and the validity of driving licences were also scrutinised before the con