JUDGMENT :

SANJIV BERRY, J.

1. Both the aforesaid writ petitions under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India have been preferred by the respective petitioners seeking quashing of the act of respondents in not considering their candidature for the post of Additional District Judge based on the notifications dated 14.11.2023 and 15.11.2023 issued by the respondent High Court, and further seeking writ of mandamus directing respondents to consider their candidature for the said post.

2. In nut shell, the case pleaded by the petitioners in their respective petitions happens to be that the petitioner in CWP-29498-2024 (hereinafter referred to as petitioner-1) had applied for the post of Additional District Judge in the State of Haryana on the basis of notification no. 188 Gaz.I/VI.F.2 dated 15.11.2023, while the petitioner in CWP-3255-2025 (hereinafter referred to as petitioner-2) had applied for the post of Additional District Judge in the States of Punjab as well as Haryana on the basis of respective notifications No. 185 Gaz.I/VI.F.2 dated 14.11.2023 and 188 Gaz.I/VI.F.2 dated 15.11.2023.

2.1 As per the said notifications, the examination comprised of two stages i.e. written test as well as viva voce. The syllabus and format was duly published in Annexure-II of the notification. The result of written examination of Haryana Superior Judicial Service Examination 2024 based on the aforesaid notification was declared wherein petitioner-1 was shown unsuccessful in the written examination.

2.2 While petitioner-2 who had applied for Haryana as well as Punjab Superior Judicial Service, was declared successful in the written examinations and then appeared in the viva voce. The final results of the examinations were declared wherein petitioner-2 was found unsuccessful, falling short of 09 and 14 marks respectively in the examination for the respective States of Haryana and Punjab. Petitioner-2 sought information under RTI and found there were cuttings of marks in various papers. It is claimed by petitioner-2 that he had successfully topped Delhi Higher Judicial Service Examination 2023 but was declared unsuccessful in the Punjab and Haryana Superior Judicial Service examination 2024 despite having scored 2^nd highest marks in the written examination therein, for unknown reasons to deny him the post.

2.3 Thus, claiming primarily the re-evaluation of their answer-sheets suspecting the act of alleged cuttings in the answer-sheet, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petitions.

3. The main issue raised in the instant petitions happens to be as to whether the petitioners are entitled to get their answer-sheets re-evaluated in the light of alleged cuttings in the marks in the answer sheets.

4. Learned Senior counsels representing the petitioners have inter alia assailed the rampant cuttings in the awarded marks in the answer-sheets of the petitioners claiming the same to have been done without any justifiable reason in an arbitrary manner. They contend that such cuttings certainly lead to the inference that the examiners were not clear in their mind as to the correctness of the answers which lead to rampant cuttings in the marks awarded to various questions attempted by the petitioners. They claimed that had such unwanted cuttings be not there, the petitioners would have been successful candidates.

4.1 The learned Senior counsel representing petitioner-2 has emphasized that petitioner-2 was declared unsuccessful for the post of Additional District Judge in the States of Punjab and Haryana on account of having falling short by merely 14 and 09 marks respectively although he had fared well in written examination as well as viva voce. He pointed out that petitioner-2 had even scored 2^nd highest marks in the written examination.

4.2 Learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner-2 has further pointed out that petitioner-2 eventually topped the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Examination 2023 and had such rampant cuttings being not their