ORDER A learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 13-6-2006 allowed the writ petition, quashed Annexure-V insofar as it relates to appointment of respondents 3 and 4 to the post of peon and directed respondents 1 and 2 to reconsider the applications of the petitioners vis-a-vis respondents 3 and 4 and thereafter to select the petitioners if they are otherwise qualified. 2. Respondent 3 came up with I.A. Nos. I and II of 2006 to recall the order dated 13-6-2006, which when allowed by order dated 12-1-2007, the writ petition was restored to file insofar as respondent 3 is concerned and the order dated 13-6-2006 was accordingly recalled. The proceeding was transmitted to this Circuit Bench, whence, this Court by order dated 21-11-2008 having directed the registry to issue Court notice to respondent 3 was served on 26-11-2008, but there is no representation for respondent 3. 3. The appointments of respondents 3 and 4 are to the post of peons with qualification as 7th Standard and knowledge of reading and writing in Kannada as set out in the Karnataka Subordinate Courts (Ministerial and Other Posts) Rules, 2001. Having had a glimpse at the order dated 13-6-2006 allowing the writ petition and quashing Annexure-V, though recalled in respect of respondent 3, but in force as against respondent 4, I find no valid legal grounds in the statement of objections of the respondent 3 to take a different view than that taken by the learned Single Judge. 4. For the very same reasons as are set out in the order dated 13-62006, the selection of respondent 3 to the post of peon not being entirely transparent, the petition is allowed. Annexure-V is quashed insofar as it relates to respondent 3, and respondents 1 and 2 are directed to reconsider the applications of the petitioners vis-a-vis that of respondent 3 and if the petitioners are otherwise qualified, it is needless to state that it may consider their appointments to the post of peon.