Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—In all these matters common questions of law and facts are involved hence as requested and agreed by learned counsel for the parties, all the petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. Since counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged in Writ Petition No. 68714 of 2011 (Akanksha Gautam v. State of U.P. and others) hence as requested by learned counsel for the parties, the pleadings therein have been read in other two matters also and during the course of argument learned counsel for the parties have referred to those pleadings with the consent of other side.

3. Heard Sri S.K.Upadhyay and Sri Babu Nandan Singh, Advocates for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4 and Sri D.P.Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

4. The issue raised herein though is a short one but with wide impact having a large number of persons within its ambit who are likely to be affected by judgment either way. It relates to the validity of certificate granted by Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindavan (Mathura) (hereinafter referred to as “GVV, Vrindavan (Mathura)”) under the title “Adhikari Pariksha”.

5. The facts in brief giving rise to the present dispute are as under.

6. The petitioner Akanksha Gautam appeared in an examination known as Adhikari Pariksha conduced by GVV, Vrindavan (Mathura) in the session 2001-02. She passed the aforesaid examination in 2002 as a regular student of Shri Vinod Bal Mandir I.C., Surendra Nagar, Aligarh in first division. The pass certificate was issued by GVV, Vrindavan (Mathura) on 30.6.2002. The aforesaid examination is claimed to be 10th class examination and was recognized by Board of High School and Intermediate, U.P. (hereinafter referred to as “U.P. Board”) under Regulation 2(30) Chapter 14 of the Regulations framed under Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 1921”) being equivalent to High School examination conducted by U.P. Board.

7. Having passed the said examination, petitioner took admission in two year intermediate course of U.P. Board through an intermediate College namely S.B.B.M. Intermediate College, Ramghat Road Aligarh and passed the intermediate examination 2004 conducted by U.P. Board. Thereafter she took admission in graduation course i.e. Bachelor of Commerce in Dev Education College, Barhan, Agra affiliated to Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra and passed three years graduation course in 2008-10.

8. For admission in BTC Course-2011 an advertisement was published by respondent No. 3 on 5.11.2011 pursuant whereto petitioner applied but her name was not included in the list of selected candidates. The petitioner came to this Court in writ petition No. 64643 of 2011 which was disposed of on 16.11.2011 with direction to Principal, District Institute of Education and Training, Madrak, Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as “DIET”) to consider and decide petitioner’s candidature and pass speaking order. Pursuant thereto impugned order dated 19.11.2011 has been passed holding that GVV, Vrindavan (Mathura) is an institution which has been found to be forged and fictitious, no examination or certificate issued thereby can be recognized for any purpose and therefore, petitioner cannot be allowed admission in B.T.C.- 2011. Aggrieved by the said order dated 19.11.2011, this writ petition No. 68714 of 2011 has been filed seeking writ of certiorari for quashing the same.

9. In Writ Petition No. 3287 of 2012 (Poonam Bharti v. State of U.P. and others), the sole petitioner passed Adhikari Pariksha from GVV, Vrindavan (Mathura) in 1995 and thereafter did intermediate from U.P.Board (Shaheed Inter College Madhuban, Mau) in 1998 and graduation from Global Open University, Nagaland in 2010. She applied for admission in BTC Training Course-2011 in DIET, Mau and her claim has been rejected by Principal, DIET Mau by order dated 16.12.2011 which is impugned in this writ petition.

10. I