JUDGMENT 1. The Special Appeal (Writ) No.370/2021 and the Writ Review Applications Nos. 49/2021, 65/2021 and 89/2021 involve identical question of facts and law and hence, same are being decided together by this common order. 2. The appellant Bhunda Ram and the review applicants Sonam Choudhary, Gopi Chand, Lokesh Chopra, Saroj, Ram Kumar Singh and Indraj Kukana are aggrieved of non-selection on the post of Senior Teacher Grade-II pursuant to the recruitment process conducted by RPSC in the year 2016. The main grievance which is raised in this appeal as well as review applications pertains to the decision taken by the RPSC in relation to the question No.37 in the General Knowledge subject and the final answer key issued on the basis of the expert opinion. 3. It may be stated here that the writ petitions preferred by the review applicants were rejected by learned Single Bench by order dated 29.05.2019. The special appeals (writ) preferred by against the order of learned Single Bench were rejected by Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.01.2021. Being aggrieved of these orders, Special Leave Petitions No.5931-5935/2021 were filed by Sonam Choudhary and others wherein, Hon'ble the Supreme Court expressed an opinion that the judgment dated 28.01.2021 passed by the High Court was not required to interference in view of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Vikesh Kumar Gupta vs State of Rajasthan reported in 2021 (2) SCC 309 which also pertains to the very same recruitment. 4. Upon expression of such opinion by Hon'ble the Supreme Court, the petitioner's counsel withdrew the petitions with liberty to pursue other remedies available under the law. Treating the said concession to be a permission to seek review of the Division Bench orders, the review applications at hand have been submitted. 5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by Shri Manoj Bhandari, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Aniket Tater, representing the review applicants, Shri Bharat Devasi, learned counsel representing the appellant Bhunda Ram, learned AAG Shri Pankaj Sharma, and Shri Khet Singh Rajpurohit, learned counsel representing the RPSC and have gone through the material available on record. 6. At the outset, it may be noted that the previous special appeal (writ) preferred by Shri Bhunda Ram being 922/2018 involving the very same controversy, has been rejected by Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.03.2019. 7. 6. At the outset, it may be noted that the previous special appeal (writ) preferred by Shri Bhunda Ram being 922/2018 involving the very same controversy, has been rejected by Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.03.2019. 7. In the case of Bhunda Ram, while passing the order dated 15.03.2021, the learned Single Bench considered the submissions advanced by counsel representing the parties, referred to another order dated 07.12.2020 passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3649-3650/2020 wherein in the very same recruitment, the select list and the wait list issued by the RPSC on the basis of the second answer key was affirmed. Precisely, the second answer key is the bone of contention between the parties in these review applications and the Special Appeal (Writ As the Hon'ble Supreme Court has affirmed the select list and the wait list and since the controversy at hand pertaining to the decision of the Expert Committee on the academic matters (questions/answer keys) has been concluded by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the judgment of Vikesh Kumar Gupta vs State of Rajasthan reported in 2021 (2) SCC 309 , we find no reason to interfere in the order dated 15.03.2021 which is assailed in the intra-court appeal of Bhunda Ram and the orders dated 28.01.2021 of which review is sought in the review applications. Hence, the appeal as well as the review applications fail and are dismissed as being devoid of merit.