Honble Amitava Lala, J.—Since both the aforesaid writ petitions involving similar controversy are connected with each other, therefore, the same are being decided by this common judgement having binding effect upon both the matters, taking Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 28351 of 2009 as leading one.

2. This writ petition, being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 28351 of 2009, has been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia as follows:

“(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring the Rule 15 (2) of the Uttar Pradesh Public Works Department Group “B” Civil Engineering Service Rules, 2004, as notified on 3.1.2004 as ultra vires of Article 14 read with Article 16 of the Constitution of India.

(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the rule making authority to provide for the criteria of written examination followed by viva-voce for the purposes of direct recruitment on the post of Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department.

(iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quash the advertisement published in the Employment News dated 7-13th June, 2008 being Advertisement No. 1/2008-09 dated 7.6.2008 in so far as it pertains to the post of Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-275-13500.

(iv) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the entire selection held in pursuance of the advertisement published in the Employment News dated 7-13th June, 2008 being Advertisement No. 1/2008-09 dated 7.6.2008 on the post of Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-275-13500.

(v) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the result published in pursuance of the advertisement so offloaded from the Internet (Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition).

(vi) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to conduct the selection afresh on the post of Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-275-13500 in pursuance of the advertisement published in the Employment News dated 7-13th June, 2008 being Advertisement No. 1/2008-09 dated 7.6.2008, after resorting to written examination followed by viva-voce examination.

(vii) Issue any other suitable writ, order or direction, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances existing in the present case.

(viii) Award the costs of this writ petition in favour of the petitioners.”

3. Virtually the petitioners have challenged the advertisement, which has been meant for selection only by way of interview but not written examination followed by interview. Contentions of the petitioners are strongly opposed by the State and the private parties i.e. selected candidates.

4. Admittedly, the petitioners have participated in the selection process, which includes examination/interview as per the advertisement, and came out unsuccessfully and thereafter challenged the selection process. Therefore, by virtue of well settled principle there is no necessity to interfere with such selection process, which has been conducted by the experts. But since vires of Rule 15(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Public Works Department Group “B” Civil Engineering Service Rules, 2004 (hereinafter in short called as the ‘Rules, 2004’) has been challenged, we are constrained to enter into merit of the matter to come to a definite conclusion in this respect. The Rules, 2004 was made in the year 2004 for civil engineering services. The procedure for recruitment as provided under such Rule is as follows :

“14. Determination of vacancies.—The appointing authority shall determine and intimate to the Commission the number of vacancies to be filled during the course of the year of recruitment as also the number of vacancies to be reserved for candidates belonging to Sched