JUDGMENT : IRSHAD ALI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing counsel, Sri O.P.M. Tripathi, Sri Ajay Kumar, Sri Prashant Arora, Sri Ghaus Beg, Sri Shivam Sharma and to Sri Neeraj Chaurasia, learned Advocate on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioners applied for U.P. T.E.T. Examination, 2018 in pursuance to notification issued by the Examination Regulatory Authority. U.P. T.E.T. Examination is a qualifying examination to apply for the recruitment on the post of Assistant Teachers in primary schools and upper primary schools run and managed by the Board of Basic Education. 3. All the petitioners have appeared in the examination and they were under bonafide belief that they will get success in the said examination. 4. Most of the petitioners have obtained 1, 2 or 3 marks less than the marks which were fixed for qualifying the U.P. T.E.T. Examination, 2018. Therefore, they have approached to this Court raising objection in regard to the options given for the certain questions in the question paper of some of the series which was provided during the examination. It is however made clear that questions were same but the serial numbers were different in different series of the question papers. 5. Dealing with the controversy in regard to the award of marks; in Question No.59 of Series - 'C' (Hindi), Question No.61 of Series - 'D' (Urdu) inasmuch as Question No.38 of Series - 'C' (Child Development and Teaching Method), in respect of the same questions bearing different serial numbers in different series. 6. Learned Single Judge of Allahabad High Court, in bunch of writ petitions with leading writ petition numbered as Writ-A No.25791 of 2018 (Smt. Shimla Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Another), after summoning the record and taking opinion of the expert, has recorded the finding and issued certain directions vide judgment and order dated 19.12.2018, which are quoted below: "44. Whether one scores 90 in general Category or 82 in reserved category or more than cut off in either of the categories, it does not make any difference. Those who score more than minimum cut off, it does not give any edge to such candidates over and above the candidates scoring lesser marks. So there is no element of inter se competition at all. Those who score more than minimum cut off, it does not give any edge to such candidates over and above the candidates scoring lesser marks. So there is no element of inter se competition at all. And, if the equity is adjusted by allotting one mark for the wrong answer or for the deleted question or in cases where more than one options are the correct answers, it will enable such candidates to acquire eligibility to participate in the selection process in future and more especially, in respect of those candidates who might be having the last chance as per the requirement of age for the purposes of appointment of Assistant Teachers under the Rules. 45. Large number of candidates before this Court in these petitions in general category have either obtained 89 marks or in reserved category have obtained 81 marks so they are just one mark behind the pass marks as 90 and 82 respectively fixed by the respondents. 46. Since the respondent Examination Regulatory Authority itself has provided one mark in respect of question No. 20 of 'A' Series (Child Development and Teaching Method) which has been deleted, to all the candidates irrespective of the fact whether they opted for any option or not, the equity can be adjusted in the present case following the same principle in respect of question No. 38 of 'C' Series (Hind) where two options were taken to be the correct answers as well as question No. 55 of 'C' Series (Hindi) in respect of which two options are also taken to be the correct answers. Similarly, in respect of Urdu paper, the question No. 65 of 'A' Series deserves to be deleted and as the respondents have opted for alloting one mark in identical situation in respect of question No. 20 of 'A' Series (supra) similarly those who have opted for Urdu paper, also deserve to be benefited identically irrespective of the fact whether they opted to answer the question or not or have opted wrong answers, such benefit, equity demands, should be given to all. 47. 47. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that the Secretary, Examination Regulatory Authority U.P. Allahabad/Prayagraj to allot one mark to every candidate in respect of question No. 38 of 'C' Series (Child Development and Teaching Method), Question No. 59 of 'C' Series (Hindi) and so also question No. 61 of 'D' Series of (Urdu) and in respect of same question bearing different serial numbers in different series. 48. With the re-distribution of marks as directed hereinabove, the results shall be declared afresh of such candidates whose position stands altered / benefited in terms of increase in marks, if any. 49. The entire exercise is to be carried out immediately. The State-respondent is also directed to extend the last date for application prescribed for under the advertisement dated 01.12.2018 for selection of Assistant Teachers (Primary Level) in respect of only those candidates who are declared to have obtained qualifying marks as a result of exercise undertaken by the Secretary, Examination Regulatory Authority U.P. in the light of the directions contained in this judgment." 7. In the present bunch of writ petitions, the similar controversy is involved, therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of in the same terms with the same directions, as has been granted in the aforesaid judgment.