ORDER 1. These appeals are filed by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission to challenge the judgments of the learned Single Judges passed in the respective writ petitions. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The record would suggest that the RPSC had conducted the recruitment tests for the post of RAS and other allied services for which advertisement was issued on 24.06.2013. The candidates who cleared the screening test were subjected to main examination. We are informed that close to 4,52,000 candidates appeared at the initial stage, of which about 15000 candidates qualified for the main examination. It is stated that during this examination the Public Service Commission had introduced for the first time, the procedure of supplying scanned copies of the answer sheets of the candidates to the examiners. In the process there were certain errors in the checking process. About 2900 candidates applied for the verified answer sheets under the Right to Information Act, of which errors were found only in about 23 answer sheets of 19 candidates. These errors principally revolved around omission to access certain answers of the candidates. These errors were corrected and results were revised. Two of these candidates improved their tally of marks so as to be included in the select list. 4. The learned Single Judges while disposing of the petitions of the unsuccessful candidates, have issued following directions:- "This Court cannot shut its eyes to such an illegality committed by the respondent-RPSC, which is casting severe aspersion upon the selection process of the State Civil Services, and therefore, the present writ petition is allowed, while issuing the following directions to the respondent-RPSC: (i) The RPSC shall manually check all the copies of the candidates, who had appeared in pursuance of the advertisement dated 24.06.2013 for the post of RAS and other Allied Services, and also, the merit shall be re-determined, and while making necessary correction in the mark-sheets of the Mains Examination, the respondents shall publish the revised results within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. After undertaking such an exercise, if the petitioner is falling in merit, then he shall be considered for appropriate appointment in his respective category, strictly in accordance with law. After undertaking such an exercise, if the petitioner is falling in merit, then he shall be considered for appropriate appointment in his respective category, strictly in accordance with law. (ii) The examiners, who were assigned the work of checking the answer scripts in the present recruitment and have left the questions-answers unchecked in the answer scripts of the candidates, as identified, would be debarred from the examiner duties/expert duties, or any kind of duties with the RPSC, for the next three years. (iii) A cost of Rs. 15,00,000/- is imposed upon the RPSC, which shall be deposited with the Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Rajasthan, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment, who shall appropriately disburse the said amount for the welfare of the poor students in the Government Primary Schools of the State, (iv) The compliance report shall be filed before this Court within a period of two months. Though the file is closed, but the compliance report shall be kept before this Court on 07.11.2018." 5. In our view, these directions are required to be reversed for the following reasons. Firstly, as pointed out, the Public Service Commission was conducting the tests in which at the first stage more than 4.5 lac candidates appeared. Secondly, in the written main examination errors were detected in only 23 papers of 19 candidates, which were corrected voluntarily. Thereafter, to subject every single paper to physical examination would add to enormous burden on the administration, that too in the tests which were conducted in the year 2013. None of the other candidates except those who had filed these petitions, have raised any grievance about their non selection. Imposing cost of Rs. 15 lac on the Rajasthan Public Service Commission was also somewhat harsh. It is not the conclusion of the learned Single Judges that there was any malafide on part of the administration in conducting the tests. Even if there were some errors which should not have happened, imposing such heavy cost was not justified. Lastly, the direction of debarring the examiners, who were responsible for such lapses permanently without hearing them also requires some modification. 6. Eventually, while disposing of these appeals, the impugned judgments, in so far as they direct rechecking of every single answer paper and imposing cost on Rajasthan Public Service Commission are reversed. Lastly, the direction of debarring the examiners, who were responsible for such lapses permanently without hearing them also requires some modification. 6. Eventually, while disposing of these appeals, the impugned judgments, in so far as they direct rechecking of every single answer paper and imposing cost on Rajasthan Public Service Commission are reversed. With respect to the action that may be taken against the erring examiners, we leave it upto the Public Service Commission and it is expected of RPSC to conduct a proper enquiry and if it is found that such lapses were on the part of the erring examiners, it would be open for the Rajasthan Public Service Commission to debar such erring officials for the period as found advisable. 7. With these observations and directions, the appeals are disposed of.