JUDGMENT :

1. This bunch of petitions have been filed raising various grounds to the appointments made in terms of the Advertisement No.03 of 2013 published by the respondent no.2 for filling up the posts of Principals in the recognized Intermediate Colleges and the High Schools recognized under the provisions of The U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and in terms of the powers conferred upon the Board by virtue of The Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education (Services Selection Boards) Act, 1982 (in short 'the 1982 Act') read with The Uttar Pradesh Secondary Education Services Selection Board Rules, 1998. In the various writ petitions, there are numerable grounds of challenge to the selections made, however, there is one common thread running across all the writ petitions being the filling up the vacancies initiated by the Advertisement No.03 of 2013 and culminating in the appointments made in the year 2022 after about 9 years is itself arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. I propose to decide this common question that has arisen in all the writ petitions pertaining to the selections made in pursuance to the Advertisement No.03 of 2013, as such, all the writ petitions are being decided by means of this common order.

2. For the sake of brevity, the averments as made in leading Writ-A No.1612 of 2022 are being referred.

3. The petitioner in the said writ petition claims to be appointed in the institution known as Rajarshi Tandon Inter College, Ram Nagar, Athgawan, District Pratapgarh which is a recognized institution under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act and drawn salary on the post of teacher. The respondent no.2 issued an Advertisement No.03 of 2013 intending to fill up the post of Principal in the added intermediate colleges. The said advertisement is appended as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In terms of the said advertisement, applications were invited from the eligible candidates upto 31.01.2014. It is informed that the said date was subsequently extended to February, 2014. The name of the institutions where the posts of Principals were vacant are also appended along with Annexure No.1.

4. It is stated that despite issuing an advertisement no steps were being taken by the respondent no.2 and suddenly in the year 2022, a decision was taken to call for two senior most teachers to fill their details on the online portal. After 10.01.2022, the manner in filling up the form etc. was also notified through an advertisement which is appended as Annexure No.5 to the writ petition. It is claimed by some of the petitioners that the petitioners names were sent by the Committee of Management, and the petitioners were called for interview, however, they were denied the permission to undergo the interview which led to the filing of the writ petition being Writ-A No.372 of 2022. The said writ petition was decided along with other writ petitions by means of a common judgment dated 25.02.2022, whereby the High Court framed two issues on the pleadings and the submissions made by the parties which are as follows:

"1. Whether the petitioners were eligible and within the zone of consideration for selection and appointment on the post of Principal which fell vacant in their Institution under Rule 11-(2) (b) of the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board, Rules, 1998 and were advertised in pursuance to the Advertisement No. 1 of 11 or Advertisement No. 3 of 2013, as the case may be ?

2. Whether the eligibility of petitioners and their claim to be in the zone of consideration for selection and appointment as Principal under Rule 11(2)(b) of the Rules, 1998 is to be considered with respect to the date fixed for calling the candidates for interview in pursuance to the Advertisement No. 1 of 2011 or 3 of 2013, as the case may be, if not; whether the petitioners have locus standi to mainta