ORDER A. G. Qurashi, J. – 1. This is a petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the COl1stitution or India seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus for quashing the examination held by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission for the post of Civil Judge, Class II, held on 19-2-89. 2. The facts leading to this petition, in brief are that the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission (hereinafter railed 'Service Commission') advertised 150 post of temporary Civil Judges. Class II, in the M. P. Judicial service, vide notice No. 0388 examination. Out of the 150 advertised posts. 101 seats were advertised for general categories and the other posts were reserved for scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidates. The petitioners in response to the above mentioned advertisement applied for the post of Civil Judge, Class, II. They were allowed to appear for the written examination. However, the petitioner were not called for interview, because according to the Service Commission they did not qualify in the written test to be called for interview. The petitioners in their petition have challenged the examination on various grounds including collusion of Ex Chairman of the Service Commission with the Khotari Institute, delay in declaring the results. non-issuance of the mark sheets and the decision in M. P. No. 1464 of 89 decided by the Gwalior Bench of this Court on 2-5-1990 whereby the Service Commission ", as directed to revalue the answer sheets of the petitioners in that case and then revise the results in respect of those two petitioners. 3. On the petition having been filed a show cause notice was issued to the Service Commission who have in pursuance of the direction of this Court filed the original answer sheets of the petitioners. Some candidates who had appeared in the examination have also made a request for being allowed to intervene and answer sheets of these candidates were also called The learned counsel for the parties agreed that in view of the urgency of the matter and to avoid further complications the writ petition may finally be decided after perusing the answer sheets. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the interveners also agreed that they do not want to press the other points raised in the petition except that the valuation of the answer books was defective and full of mistakes, and, therefore, the answer books should be revalued. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the interveners also agreed that they do not want to press the other points raised in the petition except that the valuation of the answer books was defective and full of mistakes, and, therefore, the answer books should be revalued. Therefore, the case was finally heard. 4. In view of the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court at Gwalior in M. P. No. 1464 of 89 dated 2-5-90, it cannot be disputed that the result of one of the petitioners in that petition i. e. Omprakash Gupta it was found that the valuation of the answer sheets was done carelessly and the Court after perusing the answer sheets and the model answers came to the conclusion that the petitioner was wrongly debarred from interview by Service Commission holding that he had secured only 142 marks. The Court also came to the conclusion that in view of the mistakes discovered on perusal of the answer sheets revaluation of the answer sheet of that petitioner should be made and the petitioner should be called for interview. It has been stated that in pursuance of the directions of the Court the petitioner was called for interview and he has been declared successful. 5. Normally when a petitioner approaches this Court to challenge the results declared by the Service Commission we recline to interfere with the result for the simple reason that the Service Commission being the Constitutional Authority it is expected that the examination conducted by the Service Commission are fair, impartial and do not admit of any mistake in the valuation. But, it appears, that while valuing the answer sheets, which was nothing but tallying the answer sheet with the model answer and putting a tick mark of right or wrong, the values or they may be called the checkers acted carelessly with the result that when one candidate challenged the result before the Gwalior Bench of this Court it was found that the candidate was wrongly deprived of appearing at the interview by giving him less marks in the written test than the marks to which he was entitled. Therefore, we also directed the Public Service Commission to produce the answer sheets along with the model answers in the instant case. 6. Therefore, we also directed the Public Service Commission to produce the answer sheets along with the model answers in the instant case. 6. Accordingly, in all fifteen answer sheets were produced before us and the perusal of these answer sheets show that there was a variation of I mark to 4 marks in the case of 6 candidates out of the fifteen answer books placed before us. As such it is manifest that answer books have not been valued and checked with due care and caution. This itself makes a big dent in the authenticity of the results of the written test declared by the Service Commission. It, therefore, follows that the results declared by the respondent Service Commission cannot be allowed to be sustained. 7. We have been told that over 9,000 students have appeared at the written test and about 400 and odd students were called for interview as a result of their qualifying in the written test. If we direct the revaluation of copies of all the 9,000 candidates, this will be a time consuming factor and with the declaration of results this may create further complications in the matter. At the same time if we restrict the issuance of writ in respect of the petitioners and the interveners only directing revaluation of their copies, then the other candidates may also come forward with the writs causing further complications and delays. In any case, when once we have come to the conclusion that the valuation of the answer books is not done cautiously and with due care resulting in mistake, which have been found by the Gwalior Bench as well as by us, revaluation of the answer books to a reasonable limit has to be directed in respect of the candidates who were called for interview as well as the candidates who have received marks in the written test in the vicinity of cut off marks. However, that margin between the cut off marks and the last candidates whose revaluation has to be done should also b~ broad enough to eliminate the possibility of any candidate being deprived of the benefit of revaluation who after the revaluation could be held entitled for interview. However, that margin between the cut off marks and the last candidates whose revaluation has to be done should also b~ broad enough to eliminate the possibility of any candidate being deprived of the benefit of revaluation who after the revaluation could be held entitled for interview. We also consulted the respective counsel in that behalf and after taking the conscientious of all the counsel we are of the opinion that the answer books of the petitioner, intervener, candidates who were called for interview and all those candidates who have secured a least 125 marks should be revalued and rechecked by the Service Commission. The cut off mark being 145 a margin of 20 has been kept with a view that if some mistakes are detected they shall not be beyond this range, because before us in the answer books the mistakes range between 1 to 4 marks. However, this order shall net disentitle any candidate from applying to the Public Service Commission for revaluation who has secured less than 125 marks, provided he is able to prima facie show that his performance was such that he could secure the cut-off marks entitling him to be called for interview. We are not oblivious of the fact that the Public Service Commission Rules do not provide for the revaluation of the answer books, but in the peculiar circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that a substantial percentage of the answer books perused by us were found not correctly valued, we are issuing this direction for revaluation. As the Gwalior Bench of this Court and we also have found that the answer sheets were not valued correctly, it will be in the best interests of the candidates and also in the interest of the Institution i. e. Service Commission that the revaluation should be done by only those persons who were not involved in the valuation of the answer books earlier. The modalities have to be fixed by the Service Commission and we do no propose to give any direction in this behalf. 8. In the result this petition filed by the petitioners is partially allowed. The M. P. Public Service Commission is directed to revalue the answer books of the petitioners, the interveners, all of those candidates who wert called for interview and all those candidates who have secured 125 marks or above, within a period of one month. 8. In the result this petition filed by the petitioners is partially allowed. The M. P. Public Service Commission is directed to revalue the answer books of the petitioners, the interveners, all of those candidates who wert called for interview and all those candidates who have secured 125 marks or above, within a period of one month. The Public Service Commission shall be free to revalue the copies of such candidates also who have secured less than 125 marks provided the Service Commission Authorities may feel convinced that in the case of that applicant the result can vary to the extent of more than 20 marks. In those cases the Commission shall also be free to formulate some policy wherein even a deposit, as is the case in the University Examinations, may be taken from those candidates who have secured less than 125 marks. If as a result of the revaluation any candidate is found eligible, then the Public Service Commission shall call that candidate for interview and after the interview declare the result accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.