Hon’ble M.C. Tripathi, J.—In this group of cases the petitioners have prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear provisionally in the mains examination of Assistant Prosecution Officer Exam-2015 scheduled to be held on 27th & 28th December, 2015.

2. For the sake of convenience, the facts of Writ A No. 65832 of 2015 are being noted below :

3. Gulab Chand Bharati is before this Court with the following prayer :

“(i) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner by awarding marks towards question Nos. 26 and 63 so given by the petitioner in the OMR sheet of “D” series of the subject General Knowledge and Law related to Roll No.046696 of Assistant Prosecution Officer Examination (Preliminary)-2015 conducted by Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, Allahabad.

(ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to allow and permit the petitioner to appear provisionally in the Mains Examinations for Assistant Prosecution Officer Exam-2015 which is being conducted by Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, Allahabad during the pendency of the present writ petition.

(iii) Any other suitable writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(iv) To award costs of the petition to this petitioners.”

4. Brief background of the case is that the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as Commission) advertised post of Assistant Prosecution Officer on 29.4.2015, advertising total 372 posts (229 for unreserved category, 55 for SC of UP, 88 for OBC of UP, 07 for dependents of freedom fighter, 11 for physically handicapped of UP and 74 for female of UP) to be filled up. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste category. He has submitted his application form for appearing in the preliminary examination and in pursuance of the same the Commission issued a admit card to him for appearing in the preliminary examination on 26.7.2015. For the said purpose the petitioner was also allotted a roll No.046696 as well as registration No. 60130087917. Finally the petitioner had appeared in the preliminary examination which was held on 26.7.2015 and at the time of examination he was given a question booklet of ‘D’ series bearing Code BTPUN-2015 relating to subject ‘General Knowledge’ and ‘Law’. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been awarded correct marks for question Nos. 26 of General Knowledge and 63 of Law. For ready reference the question Nos. 26 and 63 are reproduced hereinafter :

“Q. 26. Who among the following Indian mathematicians invented metric system?

(a) Aryabhatta, (b) Pingala, (c) Gargi (d) Bhasker

Q. 63. ‘A’ obtained a sum of Rs. 10000/- from ‘B’ by putting ‘B’ in fear of death. Which one of the following offences was committed by ‘A’?

(a) Cheating, (b) Robbery (c) Mischief (d) Extortion”

5. The contention of the petitioner is that he had marked (a) Aryabhatta whereas the Commission had initially accepted (b) Pingala as the correct answer. In the same way, so far as Q.63 is concerned, the petitioner has proceeded to mark (b) Robbery whereas the Commission has proceeded to accept (d) Extortion as correct answer. Finally the Commission had declared the result of preliminary examination of APO Exam-2015 in which 7795 candidates were declared successful.

6. It has also been brought on record that in order to bring complete transparency in the evaluation process the answer keys of the aforesaid preliminary examination were displayed on the website of the Commission from 6.10.2015 to 13.10.2015, which was duly advertised on 30.9.2015 and the candidates were required to file their objections, if any, r