Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J. - This bunch of petitions were heard on 18th February, 2021 and following orders were passed:-

"This bunch of writ petitions assail the select list published by the Court for appointment to the post of Stenographer Grade-3 (Category-C) and for Clerical Grade-C for the subordinate courts on the basis of Advertisement No.1 of 2014. A further prayer is made to command the respondents to conduct a fresh selection on the basis of allegations made in the writ petition.

It appears that initially when the petition was filed the limited grievance raised was with regard to prescription of 'font' for the Hindi Type Test, as according to petitioners the disclosure in that regard was made belatedly. The challenge was entertained and following interim protection was granted on 21.5.2015:-

"The petitioners are candidate for appointment on the post of Stenographer Grade-III (Category 'C') in the Establishment of the first respondent.

The first respondent has issued an advertisement No.1 on 5th September, 2014 calling applications for appointment of Stenographers against 337 posts (Approximately). The advertisement stated that separate final merit list of Stenographers shall be prepared on the basis of total marks obtained by the candidate in Test-I (Offline Examination, objective type) and Test -II (Computer Typing Test).

All the petitioners have been declared successful in the Test-I. The result of written examination has been displayed on website of the first respondent.

On 15.5.2015, Admit Cards have been issued to them on website of the first respondent along with an instructions for examination of Hindi and English Computer Type Test-II to be held on 24.5.2015. One of the instruction is for the Font to be used in Hindi typing is 'Mangal' and for English typing UTF-8.

The grievance of the petitioners is in respect of Hindi Mangal Font.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that for Mangal Font entirely different keyboard is used. The petitioners have practiced on Kruti Dev Font which is widely used. It is submitted that in the High Court and subordinate courts also Kruti Dev Font is commonly used. It is urged that in the advertisement there was no indication that typing test shall be held in Mangal Font. The petitioners have been given only 5 days notice for change of Font. In such a short notice it is impossible for them to learn and practice a new font. It is also more difficult to learn Hindi typing with InScript Keyboard i.e. on Mangal keyboard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure-3 filed along with the Supplementary Affidavit which is xerox copy of key lay out with Mangal Font and key lay out for Kruti Dev Font, to demonstrate that both the keyboards are totally different. In fact there is no similarity between them. The petitioners have also given detail illustrations in their pleadings to highlight the difference between the two lay out of the keyboards and their use.

Learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent has made following submissions:-

i) there are only few petitioners who have challenged the selection'

ii) High Court has received a communication dated 22.7.2014 from the Member (Judicial) E-Committee, Supreme Court regarding use of UNICODE Fonts for the regional language;

iii) in the advertisement it was not necessary to mention the Font to be used.

I have considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioners have made out a prima facie case.

The lay out of the keyboard of Kruti Dev and Mangal Font is entirely different. Indisputably, Kurti Dev Font is commonly used in High Court and subordinate courts, therefore, the petitioners have been under impression that their Computer Typing Test shall be held in commonly used Kruti Dev Font.

In my view the petitioners have not been given sufficient time to prepare themselves for change of Font. The High Court has received communication of the Supreme Court in July, 2014. The advertisement was issued on 5th September, 2014 but no indication was given in the advertisement about the use of a particular Font.

The petitioners have brought on the record advertisement issued by the other Government Departments and Institutions as illustration to establish that Fonts are mentioned in the Advertisement itself.

For the reasons mentioned above, it is directed that the selection may go on but the result in respect of five petitioners herein shall not be declared till the next date of listing. The petitioners are at liberty to appear in the Examination without prejudice to their rights.

Learned counsel for the first respondent prays for and is granted ten days time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder, if any be filed within a week thereafter.

List this case on 6th July, 2015, before the appropriate Bench."

It is thereafter that the select list has been published while withholding the result of the petitioners in the present bunch. As the select list in its entirety was assailed, this Court on 6.5.2019 proceeded to make following observations:-

"This petition impugns a final select list for the post of Stenographer Grade -III and clerical cadre in the subordinate Courts of the State. Though this petition has been pending on the board of this Court since 2015, the Court notes that an Impleadment Application was filed on behalf of the petitioners which was allowed and six selected candidates were impleaded. By a subsequent order passed in these proceedings, the Court had directed service upon these private respondents to be effected through the concerned District Judges. In terms thereof these private respondents as per the Affidavit of Service filed on behalf of the High Court have been served. The Court is however informed that in the selection process as many as 327 Stenographers and approximately 2000 Junior Assistants came to be selected and appointed.

As this Court peruses the order sheet, it is evident that at no stage has the Court either recorded its satisfaction of the selected candidates being apprised of these proceedings by virtue of the impleadment of the six private respondents here nor had it at any stage recorded that the petitioners were being permitted to assail the entire select list by impleadment of the six respondents in a representative capacity.

In view thereof, the ends of justice would warrant the Registrar General of the Court being requested to direct the concerned District Judges under whom the selected candidates presently work, of the pendency of this batch of writ petitions and the challenge to the select list in its entirety as comprised in these petitions. The Registrar General shall consequently instruct all the District Judges to proceed in the matter further in light of the directions framed above and apprise all the selected candidates of their right, if so chosen and advised, to contest these proceedings. The respondents may file an Affidavit of Compliance of these directions of a competent officer on or before the next date fixed.

With the consent of parties, list this batch of petitions again on 23 May 2019.

The respondents shall ensure compliance of these directions on or before the said date."

On 21.10.2019 this Court again passed following orders:-

"Sri Anil Babu, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent has filed affidavit of service stating that all the selected candidates, who are likely to be affected by the outcome of this writ petition in the various district courts of the State, have been put to notice by the respective District Judges.

The private respondents are granted four weeks' and no more time to file counter affidavit.

List on 27 November 2019, among top ten cases."

It is, therefore, apparent that all selected candidates have been put to notice of the present petition and some of them have also been arranged as respondents in representing capacity. Notices have been served to all selected candidates. Affidavits have also been filed on behalf of some of the selected candidates. The matter is, therefore, ripe for hearing.

On the last date when the matter was taken up the petition was adjourned on the prayer of Senior Counsel for the respondents, who wanted time to obtain further instructions in the matter. Instructions have been received and this Court finds that challenge laid to the recruitment will have to be examined by this Court on merits.

Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel contends that this matter be adjourned so that the parties be fully prepared to advance their arguments.

In view of the above, let this petition be placed before the Court, once again, as first case at 2.00 p.m. on 23.2.2021 for adjudication.

It is made clear that no request for adjournment on either of the sides will be entertained on the next fixed."

2. The matter accordingly has been heard today at length and the respondents have also produced relevant records. Having perused the materials on record, the Court proposes to dispose of the writ petitions by this composite judgment. Writ Petition No. 29665 of 2015 (Vinit Kumar And 4 Others Vs. The Registrar General High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad) is taken to be the leading case.

3. This bunch of petitions challenge the final select lists published for appointment to the post of Stenographer Grade III (Category 'C') and Clerical Category 'C' for the Subordinate Courts, pursuant to two separate Advertisement No. 01/Sub. Court/Stenographer/2014 and Advertisement No. 01/Sub. Court/Category 'C'/Clerical Cadre/2014. A further prayer is made to command the respondents to hold fresh selections for the post advertised vide above Advertisements, after specifying the font for Hindi typing test.

4. The advertisements were issued by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad to recruit 327 Stenographers and 2341 Clerical Cadre Posts for appointment in different district judgeships of the State of Uttar Pradesh. Vacancies for Stenographers included both English and Hindi Stenographers. The advertised posts form part of the cadre constituted by virtue of Rule 3 (2) read with schedule A' of the Uttar Pradesh State District Court Service Rules, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 2013'). Schedule B' to the Rules of 2013 specify the qualification and method of recruitment. The eligibility for appointment has been specified in the advertisement, which reads as under:-

"For Hindi Stenographers: Qualification

Graduation with Diploma or Certificate in Stenography with a speed of 80 w.p.m. in shorthand and 30 w.p.m. in Typing both in Hindi along with CCC certificate issued By DOEACC Society and 25/30 words per minute for Hindi/English Typewriting on Computer, (As per G.O. No. 1595/7-Nyay-2-2011-68G/2011 dated 17.02.2012)

For English Stenographers:

Graduation with Diploma or Certificate in Stenography with a speed of 100 w.p.m. in shorthand and 40 w.p.m. in Typing both in English along with CCC certificate issued By DOEACC Society and 25/30 words per minute for Hindi/English Typewriting on Computer, (As per G.O. No. 1595/7-Nyay-2-2011-68G/2011 dated 17.02.2012)

Syllabus for Stenographers for Offline Exam:

Hindi, English, General Studies, Mathematics: Total No. of Questions 100. Maximum Marks will be 100.

Computer Knowledge i.e. Data Entry, Word Processing and Computer Operation etc.

Essential Qualifications For Clerical Cadre:

5. The centralized system of examination was evolved for the first time for appointment to the cadre posts included in the Rules of 2013, for various district judgeships by the High Court. The task of recruitment was assigned to M/s Tata Consultancy Service Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'TCS'). The appointments to the post were otherwise to be governed by the Rules of 2013.

6. Pursuant to the advertisement aforesaid large number of candidates applied for appointment. The first stage of recruitment consisted of an offline objective type examination out of 100 marks. The second stage of recruitment consisted of computer type test (English & Hindi)(Maximum Marks 50) to be followed with Stage III consisting of Hindi/English Shorthand Test for Stenographers (Maximum Marks 50).

7. So far as the conduct of first stage examination both in Stenographer and Clerical Cadre is concerned, there are no issues.

8. It is admitted on record that the impugned select list has been drawn on the basis of merit list drawn by adding the marks secured by a candidate in all three stages for Stenographers and the two stages for the Clerical Cadre.

9. From the records it is apparent that no marking/evaluation criteria was specified in the advertisement, nor any such stipulation exists in the rules. No minimum marks were fixed for the type test or the shorthand exam. It is also admitted that prior to conduct of aforesaid examination, the High Court or the Recruitment and Appointment Cell of the High Court had not finalized any marking or evaluation criteria for appointment(s) in question. The marking and evaluation process, therefore, was evolved exclusively by the outsourced agency i.e. TCS. The criteria for evaluation and marking, as determined by TCS has been placed on record by the respondents in their second supplementary counter affidavit as Annexure SCA-1. This document is a communication sent by TCS in response to a letter sent by the Recruitment Cell of the High Court, which is extracted hereinafter:-

"2. Exam Process for Stenographer Grade III - Category C (Response to para no. 8)

There was total three stages in examination:

Stage 1: Offline Examination (Maximum Marks: 100)

Stage 2: Computer Typing Test (English and Hindi) (Maximum Marks: 50)

Stage 3: Hindi/English Shorthand Test (Maximum Marks: 50)

Agency has conducted the STAGE 1 offline exam for all the candidates appearing for Stenographer Grade III- Category C. Candidates were evaluated as per evaluation criteria attached as annexure 1. Five candidates in order of Merit against each post category-wise were shortlisted for appearing in stage 2 Computer Typing Test and stage 3 Hindi/English Shorthand Test.

Agency has conducted the STAGE 2 Computer Typing Test (English and Hindi) for candidates selected in stage 1 examination. Hindi/English Typing test was conducted and score was evaluated as per evaluation criteria attached as annexure 2. As no marking/evaluation criteria was mentioned in advertisement neither shared by High Court, so Marking for Hindi/English Typing test was done with provision for negative marking. Cut off marks for this test was not defined in the Advertisement hence score was calculated which may be positive, zero or negative.

Agency has conducted the STAGE 3 Hindi/English Shorthand Test for candidates selected in stage 1 examination. Hindi/English Shorthand Test was conducted and score was evaluated as per evaluation criteria attached as annexure 3. As no marking/evaluation criteria was mentioned in advertisement neither shared by High Court, so Marking for Hindi/English Shorthand test was done with provision for negative marking. Cut off marks for this test was not defined in the Advertisement hence score was calculated which may be positive, zero or negative.

Final score considered for Merit List was prepared after consolidation of marks of all appeared candidate in Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 Examination hence combined score calculated may be positive, zero or negative. Final Merit List was prepared based on criteria mentioned in advertisement."

10. So far as the examination for the Clerical Cadre is concerned, the communication specifies following process for recruitment:-

"Agency has conducted the STAGE 1 offline exam for all the candidates appearing for Clerical Cadre- Category C. Candidates were evaluated as per evaluation criteria attached as annexure 1. Five candidates in order of Merit against each post category-wise were shortlisted for appearing in stage 2 Computer Typing Test.

Agency has conducted the STAGE 2 Computer Typing Test (English and Hindi) for candidates selected in stage 1 examination. Hindi/English Typing test was conducted and score was evaluated as per evaluation criteria attached as annexure 2. As no marking/evaluation criteria was mentioned in advertisement neither shared by High Court, so Marking for Hindi/English Typing test was done with provision for negative marking. Cut off marks for this test was not defined in the Advertisement hence score was calculated which may be positive, zero or negative.

Final score considered for Merit List was prepared after consolidation of marks of all appeared candidate in Stage 1 and Stage 2 Examination hence combined score calculated may be positive, zero or negative. Final Merit List was prepared based on criteria mentioned in advertisement."

11. The examination, accordingly, has been conducted and two select lists were prepared by M/s TCS. The lists have also been approved by the Recruitment Committee of High Court. Appointments have been made in the year 2015 based on such select lists.

12. The written examination for the stenographer cadre was held on 27.9.2014 while for the clerical cadre written test was held on 18.10.2014. The computer test was conducted on 23rd & 24th May, 2015 and the final select lists have been published on 17.7.2015, which are under challenge in these petitions.

13. The initial challenge to the recruitment exercise was laid on the ground that Hindi type font was not specified in the advertisement or thereafter and that it was just a few days prior to holding of type test that Admit Cards were issued which specified the type font on which Hindi typing test was to be conducted. The leading writ petition, accordingly, was entertained and following interim protection has been granted on 21st May, 2015:-

"The petitioners are candidate for appointment on the post of Stenographer Grade-III (Category 'C') in the Establishment of the first respondent.

The first respondent has issued an advertisement No.1 on 5th September, 2014 calling applications for appointment of Stenographers against 337 posts (Approximately). The advertisement stated that separate final merit list of Stenographers shall be prepared on the basis of total marks obtained by the candidate in Test-I (Offline Examination, objective type) and Test -II (Computer Typing Test).

All the petitioners have been declared successful in the Test-I. The result of written examination has been displayed on website of the first respondent.

On 15.5.2015, Admit Cards have been issued to them on website of the first respondent along with an instructions for examination of Hindi and English Computer Type Test-II to be held on 24.5.2015. One of the instruction is for the Font to be used in Hindi typing is 'Mangal' and for English typing UTF-8.

The grievance of the petitioners is in respect of Hindi Mangal Font.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that for Mangal Font entirely different keyboard is used. The petitioners have practiced on Kruti Dev Font which is widely used. It is submitted that in the High Court and subordinate courts also Kruti Dev Font is commonly used. It is urged that in the advertisement there was no indication that typing test shall be held in Mangal Font. The petitioners have been given only 5 days notice for change of Font. In such a short notice it is impossible for them to learn and practice a new font. It is also more difficult to learn Hindi typing with InScript Keyboard i.e. on Mangal keyboard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure-3 filed along with the Supplementary Affidavit which is xerox copy of key lay out with Mangal Font and key lay out for Kruti Dev Font, to demonstrate that both the keyboards are totally different. In fact there is no similarity between them. The petitioners have also given detail illustrations in their pleadings to highlight the difference between the two lay out of the keyboards and their use.

Learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent has made following submissions:-

i) there are only few petitioners who have challenged the selection'

ii) High Court has received a communication dated 22.7.2014 from the Member (Judicial) E-Committee, Supreme Court regarding use of UNICODE Fonts for the regional language; iii) in the advertisement it was not necessary to mention the Font to be used.

I have considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioners have made out a prima facie case.

The lay out of the keyboard of Kruti Dev and Mangal Font is entirely different. Indisputably, Kurti Dev Font is commonly used in High Court and subordinate courts, therefore, the petitioners have been under impression that their Computer Typing Test shall be held in commonly used Kruti Dev Font.

In my view the petitioners have not been given sufficient time to prepare themselves for change of Font. The High Court has received communication of the Supreme Court in July, 2014. The advertisement was issued on 5th September, 2014 but no indication was given in the advertisement about the use of a particular Font.

The petitioners have brought on the record advertisement issued by the other Government Departments and Institutions as illustration to establish that Fonts are mentioned in the Advertisement itself.

For the reasons mentioned above, it is directed that the selection may go on but the result in respect of five petitioners herein shall not be declared till the next date of listing. The petitioners are at liberty to appear in the Examination without prejudice to their rights.

Learned counsel for the first respondent prays for and is granted ten days time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder, if any be filed within a week thereafter.

List this case on 6th July, 2015, before the appropriate Bench."

14. The leading writ petition has since been amended and challenge to the selection has been made also on the ground that no objective criteria was followed for determining the interse merit of candidates who had taken part inasmuch as candidates, who have secured 'zero' or 'negative' marks in the shorthand and typing test have also been selected. According to petitioners this is wholly impermissible as those securing zero or negative marks would not have necessary proficiency for the job and the very purpose of recruitment is frustrated. It has also been urged that selection undertaken is arbitrary, as those who have acquired eligibility qualification after commencement of recruitment have also been permitted to take part in the recruitment. It is further urged on behalf of the petitioners that although 2220 candidates had appeared in the type test, but 2369 candidates are shown to have qualified, which is impermissible.

15. A counter affidavit has been filed in which the selection proceedings undertaken are defended on the ground that a fair and transparent process was followed by the High Court for appointment to the post of Stenographer and Clerks, and that there is no illegality in the selection process. It is also urged that specification of font, prior to conduct of type test cannot be said to be arbitrary, inasmuch as, all applicants were subjected to uniform process and same font has been used for adjudging the proficiency of all candidates. It is also urged on behalf of the respondents that some of the candidates had applied both for English and Hindi Stenographer and, therefore, though the number of applicants remain 2220, yet the total number of selected persons were more. 149 candidates, as a matter of fact got selected both as English Stenographers and Hindi Stenographers. Lastly, it is urged on behalf of the respondents that as recruitment has already been undertaken way back in 2015 and such selected persons are also working, as such, no interference be made with the process of selection as it would adversely affect the ongoing work of the district judiciary. A statement is also made by the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents with reference to Para 7 of the supplementary counter affidavit that those who were found ineligible on the last date of filing of the application due to their eligibility qualification being of a later date have already been removed.

16. It is with reference to the above contentions that the matter needs to be examined. I have heard Sri V.P. Mishra, Sri Akhilesh Tripathi, Sri Rajesh Kumar Dubey, Sri Dharmendra Kumar Mishra, Sri Rajendra Prasad Pandey, Sri Brijendra Kumar Pandey, Sri Mrigraj Singh, Sri Mohan Srivastava, Sri G.C. Tiwari, Sri Durgesh Kumar Tripathi, Sri Harendra Prakash Dwivedi, Sri Kartikeya Saran and Sri Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ashish Mishra for the High Court and district judgeship, Dr. A.N. Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi, Sri Rajesh Tripathi, Sri Vachaspati Tiwari, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, Sri Maneesh Kumar, Sri Manoj Kumar, Sri Ajay Singh, Sri Rajiv Kumar Mishra, Sri Ritesh Srivastava, Sri Ambrish Shukla, Sri Vivek Kumar Pal, Sri Ravindra Kumar Gaur, Sri Krishna Kumar Singh and Dr. A.N. Singh for the selected candidates, who have filed their counter affidavit adopting the stand taken by the Court.

17. Facts, as have been noticed above, are not in issue. The recruitment in question has been conducted in accordance with the provisions contained in the Rules of 2013. It is admitted that recruitment for different posts in the district judgeships were made for the first time by the High Court and the recruitment was entrusted to be carried out by M/s TCS. The recruitment proceedings were accordingly undertaken for appointment to the cadre posts of Stenographer and Clerks. A stenographer and clerk in the district judgeship performs important work. Presiding Officers of the District Court cannot discharge their judicial function unless they are backed by competent supporting staff. Maintenance of court records, recording of witnesses statements, taking down dictation are some of the works entrusted to such employees. The work to be performed by these persons, therefore, requires high degree of proficiency, integrity and sincerity and any compromise with it is likely to adversely affect the cause of dispensation of justice itself.

18. The proficiency on part of typist/stenographer can be judged on the basis of an objective criteria/parameters to be fixed for the purpose.

19. The appointments in the present case have been made on the basis of type and shorthand test conducted by M/s TCS. The process, which has been followed by them, consists of evaluation of applicants based upon the criteria determined by them. Admittedly this criteria has not had the conscious approval of the Court. No minimum marks were fixed for the type or shorthand test in the exam. It is also admitted to the respondents that the select lists contain large number of persons who have either scored 'zero' marks or their marks are in the 'negative'.

20. Use of negative marking in a recruitment examination is one of the accepted modes employed in a recruitment process to determine suitability of a candidate for appointment. It is clearly permissible in law. The skill/proficiency of a candidate is judged by accounting for his positive attributes vis-a-vis negative attributes. In a case where negatives outweigh the positive attributes of a candidate, the proficiency would be suspect.

21. In case of a typist or stenographer the award of marks assumes significance. It is by the marks secured by a candidate that his typing or shorthand skills can be adjudged so as to ascertain his suitability for appointment. If a stenographer makes more errors in noting the statement of witnesses or taking down orders of Judge the sanctity of very judicial institution would be compromised. Some scope for errors and its corrections are always permissible, but where the negatives scored by the candidate are in excess of the positives scored by him then such candidate would clearly be unfit for appointment.

22. The object of recruitment for a particular post is to ensure that the selected candidate possesses requisite proficiency to perform the work assigned to him. It is for this reason that evaluation and marking criteria must be fixed by the employer so that the recruitment remains relevant.

23. A private recruitment agency on its own may not know the specific needs of a judicial institution. Such agency, on its own would thus not be equipped to fix minimum benchmarks for adjudging proficiency for the job. Its decision to allow candidates with zero and negative marks also in the select list, therefore, cannot be accepted. The minimum attributes that needs to be possessed by a candidate for appointment must be determined on a rational and objective criteria suited for specific work. This must be done by the employer/competent authority.

24. The admitted scenario that emerge on record poses a disturbing picture, inasmuch as, candidates who have scored 'zero' marks or 'minus' marks in the computer typing test or stenography examination, have also been adjudged suitable for the job at hand. By no reasonable standards such candidates can be said to possess requisite qualification to work as Clerk or Stenographer in the district judiciary. Failure to fix minimum marks has allowed entry into service to those who do not meet the minimum benchmark expected of a Stenographer/Clerk.

25. The respondents have tried to convince the Court about the fairness of the process with reference to the criteria which has been adopted by the private agency. It is stated that by following a complex formula the criteria itself has been evolved which would ensure that a person with necessary merit alone gets selected. This argument of the respondents does not appeal to reason, inasmuch as, awarding of marks is one of the most accepted criteria for adjudging the suitability of a candidate for the post. Once a person is awarded 'zero' marks, it would be difficult to accept the respondents contention that even such candidate would possess requisite efficiency and merit for appointment to the post.

26. The argument advanced on behalf of the petitioners that process itself was vitiated and the second stage of examination process is not sustainable for the above reasons, therefore, appears to have merit.

27. This conclusion of the Court is supported by the records that have been produced by the respondents. The original records would clearly go to show that the recruitment criteria including assessment and marking etc. were fixed by the private recruitment agency and were not placed before the Court or the Recruitment Committee for its prior approval. It was only after the results were presented in a sealed cover that the matter was placed before the Recruitment Committee and it was approved. The criteria adopted by the private agency which allowed candidates with 'zero' or minus marks also to be selected has had no specific approval of the Recruitment Committee or the Court.

28. The Court is further apprised with reference to the records produced that the recruitment committee of the Court for the subsequent recruitment has examined this aspect of the matter and a criteria has now been evolved to judge the skills of applicant. As per the criteria fixed a candidate will have to obtain minimum cut off marks of 10 out of 25 in both computer type test (Hindi & English). Similarly for the post of Stenographer a minimum of 35 out of 50 marks has been made compulsory. The decision taken subsequently by the recruitment committee, upon evaluation of the required criteria for recruitment, is reproduced hereinafter:-

"After consideration, the Committee resolves that evaluation criteria for Answer Sheets of Stenography test for Stenographer Gr.III Post (Post Code 01) and Hindi/English Computer type test of Group 'C' (Clerical Cadre, Post Code 02) be adopted as applied for evaluation of typed answer sheets under the U.P. Fast Track Court/Additional Court & Contractual ICT posts Recruitment 2017 resolved vide minutes dated 06.09.2018. The same criteria be also adopted in the evaluation of Stenography typed sheet and Hindi/English Computer typed sheets for the examination held under the Uttar Pradesh Civil Court Staff Centralized Recruitment 2016-17. The criteria to be adopted in evaluation of typed sheets of Stenography is as hereunder:

(i) extra words typed by the candidates on transcription of dictated matter on typed sheet be ignored in the evaluation of typed sheets.

(ii) the candidates must obtain 35 marks out of 50 marks in Hindi/English shorthand to qualify in the Test.

The Criteria to be adopted in evaluation of typed answer sheets of Group 'C' (Clerical Cadre) is as hereunder:

1. Marks must be awarded to the candidate on typed text of given passage (Hindi/English) in batches.

2. Typing speed of all the candidates be calculated by standard time, prescribed in advertisement i.e. 10 minutes.

3. For achieving minimum benchmark on Computer Type Test (Hindi/English), candidate shall have to obtain minimum cut-off marks i.e. 10 Marks out of 25 marks in both type tests (Hindi & English Computer type test).

4. Candidate shall not be considered for final selection who fails to obtain minimum prescribed cut-off marks in both Type Test."

29. In addition to the above criteria the Recruitment Committee has also adopted and implemented the marking criteria vide its resolution dated 02.04.2019, which came to be approved by the Hon'ble Chief Justice on 03.04.2019.

30. The subsequent guidelines approved by the Court, noted above, clearly contain necessary safeguards and criteria warranted for undertaking a fair and transparent process of recruitment to the posts itself. Due care and caution has been taken to determine the merit of candidates to be selected for appointment in the district judgeship. As against this, the previous recruitment exercise in question, undertaken by the private agency, is not based upon any objective criteria which may withstand the test of judicial scrutiny.

31. In light of the above discussions, this Court has no hesitation in holding that second and third stage of the recruitment for the posts in question cannot be adjudged valid. This stage of recruitment is thus found to be unsustainable in law.

32. Petitioners' contention that they were also not informed of the Hindi type font, sufficiently in advance to enable them to practice on it also needs to be examined. As against computer typing in English where change of font does not affect the skill of typist the situation is distinct in case of Hindi typing. Typing of Hindi words in Devnagari varies from font to font. Kruti Dev is one of the main fonts that is used by Hindi typists. Mangal is also an accepted font but larger number of candidates use Kruti Dev. Unless a candidate has sufficient practice of Hindi typing in a particular font it is not easy to change from one to another overnight. Though, it is always open for the employer to specify the font for testing the typing skill of a candidate, but it ought to be done in a manner such that all candidates get a fair opportunity to practice on it and compete. Giving of just a few days notice before the conduct of typing test also would be an additional ground to question the second and third stage of recruitment. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the select lists published by the Court is not truly reflective of the merit of a candidate required for his appointment to the post in question. The second and third stage of recruitment cannot, thus, be sustained.

33. This takes the Court to the next question that is whether the entire recruitment in question needs to be interfered with or the process can be corrected from the stage it has gone bad The Court will also have to examine the nature of rights that is created in the selected candidates, if any, for the purposes of its protection.

34. The first part of recruitment for both the posts carries no defect. It consisted of an objective type test and none of the petitioners has raised any issue questioning its sanctity. The challenge to recruitment, which is upheld by this Court is limited to the second and third stage of examination i.e. conduct of type test and shorthand exam.

35. The defect noticed in the second and third part of the recruitment can easily be cured by subjecting all candidates who were called to face second and third stage of recruitment, afresh, on the basis of relevant criteria for adjudging their suitability. This will adequately protect the rights of the selected candidates also.

36. In Hitendra Singh and others Vs. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth and others, (2014) 8 SCC 369 , [LQ/SC/2014/377] the Supreme Court examined a similar situation on facts where the appointments made were found to be illegal later in an enquiry. While examining the rights of persons selected in such invalid process the Supreme Court observed as under:-

34. Continuance in office of those selected by means that are not fair, transparent and reasonable will amount to perpetuating the wrong. The length of service put in by the candidates who were selected on the basis of such a faulty selection process may be one of the considerations that enters the mind of the Court but there are other weighty considerations that cannot be given a go-by or conveniently forgotten lest those who do not adopt such malpractices or those who expect the system to protect their interest and their rights are eternally disappointed and left to believe that a wrong once done will never be corrected just because the legal process by which it is to be corrected is a long and winding process that often takes years to reach fruition.

35. Having said that we must say that the main contention which the petitioners have urged in support of their continuance in service is that they have become overage for any government employment at this stage. If ousted from service the petitioners will have no place to go nor even an opportunity to compete for the vacancies against which they were appointed. That is an aspect which can be and ought to be considered especially when there is no allegation leave alone evidence about any bribery having taken place in the issue of appointment orders by the officials concerned. Even so, continuance of the petitioners in service would not, in our opinion, be justified having regard to the background in which the selection and appointments were made and eventually set aside by the University. All that the long years of service rendered with the University may secure for the petitioners is a direction to the effect that in any future selection against the vacancies caused by their ouster and other vacancies that may be available for the next selection the petitioners shall also be considered in relaxation of the upper age-limit prescribed for them. Such of the petitioners who could try their luck in the next selection and who succeed in the same will also have the benefit of continuity of service.

36. That brings us to the method of selection that may be followed filling up the vacancies that will be caused by the ouster of the petitioners. An affidavit has in that regard been filed by Shri Dnyaneshwar Ashru Bharati, Registrar of the respondent University stating that in terms of Maharashtra Act 32 of 2013 the Maharashtra State Legislature has amended the Maharashtra Agricultural Universities (Krishi Vidyapeeth) Act, 1983. Section 58 of the principal Act as substituted by Act 32 aforementioned provides that no person shall be appointed by the University as a member of the academic staff, except on the recommendation of a Selection Board constituted for the purpose in accordance with the provisions of the statutes made in that behalf. The posts of SRAs and JRAs are classified as academic as per Statute 71 of the MAU Statutes 1990. The process of amendment to Statutes 75 and 76 is now underway. The affidavit further states that the University will not be in a position to undertake the selection process of posts advertised on 23-5-2012 and that selection will be done by the Recruitment Board as per the new selection procedure. The affidavit is, however, silent as to the procedure that shall be followed by the Selection Board constituted for the purpose.

37. Be that as it may the establishment of a Selection Board and formulation of proper procedure to be followed by the Board will go a long way in making the process of selection and recruitment objective, fair and reasonable apart from bringing transparency to the norms and the process by which such recruitments were made. We only hope that the process of amendment of the relevant statute is expedited by the University and concluded as far as possible within six months from today and process of filling up of posts of SRAs and JRAs currently held by the petitioners and those that were advertised in terms of advertisement dated 23-3-2012 undertaken in accordance with such procedure."

37. Private respondents, who have been selected on the basis of a irrational and unsustainable criteria, elaborated above, cannot assert any right to continue on the basis of such selection. The limited right that is available to such candidates is to be provided with a fair opportunity to compete in a transparent and fair process of selection. Rights of selected candidates would, therefore, be adequately protected by allowing them to face second and third stage of recruitment, to be conducted afresh, as per the norms already fixed by the Recruitment Committee.

38. It is worth reiterating that the stenographers and clerks posted in district judgeship otherwise perform important work and help in proper dispensation of justice and their merit cannot be compromised, in any manner.

39. Having observed so, this Court has also to keep in mind other considerations urged on behalf of the respondents i.e. immediate requirement of stenographers and persons for clerical cadre in the district judiciary. Selected persons are presently performing such work. In case these persons are ousted at this stage itself it may adversely affect the work of district judgeships. In order to balance the need of fair and transparent recruitment vis-a-vis need of Court to carry out its primary function of dispensing justice, a fair method will have to be evolved to protect the need of the court and also the criteria of a fair and transparent selection.

40. In the facts of the case, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if the respondents are directed to conduct Stage II and III of the recruitment process afresh, as applicable, by subjecting all candidates who have qualified Stage I of the two recruitments and have participated in Stage II and III as applicable, to appear in it. The criteria for holding of typing and stenography test would be such as is already approved by the recruitment committee in its subsequent minutes which have the approval of Hon'ble the Chief Justice. A fresh select list would be drawn within a period of five months from today. Impugned select lists and the continuance of private respondents pursuant to it shall abide by the fresh select list to be published by the Court, in the manner indicated above. Promotional and other benefits granted to the candidates selected earlier shall be protected if their names figure in the fresh select list also.

41. In light of the above directions, this bunch of writ petitions are disposed of. No order is passed as to costs.