Hon’ble Virendra Vikram Singh, J.—The petitioner has rushed to this Court while complaining the indiscriminate orders passed by the Union Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred as Commission) and U.P. Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred as U.P. Commission).

2. The brief facts are that the petitioner in search of Government job appeared in different examinations conducted by the Commission and the U.P. Commission presently respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

3. In the same series of examinations he appeared in the Civil Services Examinations, 2009 conducted by the Commission. In the Civil Services Main Examinations while the application of the petitioner was scrutinised by the Commission, it was found that the petitioner made false statement regarding the previous attempts made by him. It was eighth attempt whereas the petitioner showed it to be seventh only. It was found that if the petitioner would have disclosed the correct number of previous attempts made, he would not have been eligible for appearing in all the concerned examinations.

After issuing notice to the petitioner on 22.1.2010, the Commission passed the impugned order dated 15.2.2010 and thereby cancelled the candidature of the petitioner for the Civil Services Main Examination 2009 and also debarred him from all the examinations to be conducted by the Commission for a period of ten years to be commuted from 11.2.2010. This order was also circulated to all the State Commissions.

4. Apart from the examinations conducted by the Commission, the petitioner also appeared in the examinations conducted by the U.P. Commission. The details whereof have been given in the writ petition.

5. Having received the information about debarring the petitioner, the U.P. Commission also debarred the petitioner from all the examinations with effect from 11.2.2010 for a period of ten years and did not declare the results of the petitioner. While the result of the petitioner was not declared by U.P. Commission, he on 5.4.2010 filed an application under Right to Information Act, which was replied in terms that he has been debarred for all examinations to be conducted by the U.P. Commission. This office memo dated 12.4.2010 is also under challenge in the present writ petition.

By filing the present petition, the petitioner has made the following prayers.

“I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision dated 15.2.2010 taken by the U.P. Public Service Commission as informed by the information dated 12.4.2010 given to the petitioner under Right to Information Act.

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties to declare the results of the petitioner for the examinations that is Combined Lower Subordinate Mains Exams-2004 (General Recruitment), (Combined State Lower Subordinate Prelims Examination Special Recruitment-2004, Combined State/Upper Subordinate Service Mains Examination-2007, Combined State/Upper Subordinate Mains Examination-2008, Combined State Upper Subordinate Special Recruitment Prelims Examination-2008, Combined State Upper Subordinate Special Recruitment Prelims Examination-2008, Combined State/Upper Subordinate Prelims Examination-2009, GIC Inter College Screening Examination-2009 and may not be treated as debarred”

6. In the present case, pleadings have been exchanged between the parties and after hearing learned counsel for the parties the petition is being decided.

7. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that the decision of the Commission dated 15.2.2010 is indiscriminately harsh to the petitioner. It has further been argued that under the provisions of article 315 of the Constitution of India, the Commission and the U.P. Commission are two different and separate entities and simply by the fact that the Commission has debarred the petitioner from further examination conducted by it, the U.P. Commission was nowhere bound by the decision and it cou