also made in their favour by the BPSC their action to deny appointment on the pretext of lacking eligibility is an afterthought. The petitioners were allowed to participate in the written test and interview. They appeared in written exam and their suitability was tested in the interview and after their performance, they have been recommended by the BPSC. The precious time of the petitioners were spoiled by the respondents in this process. Holding exam for selection is not public relation exercise, those involved in the selection are supposed to conduct its business with sum amount of seriousness and accountability. Para 19 of the supplementary counter affidavit as quoted here in above, reflects the fantastic plea taken by the department of science and Technology that the issue of eligibility of these petitioners were not noted due to the fact no query was made by the BPSC about these petitioners. This statement is a false statement and runs contrary to letter enclosed as Annexure -B to the counter affidavit of BPSC, the department has taken the stand that the recommendation of the BPSC is contrary to the eligibility conditions which in the fact an attempt to pass buck and fix responsibility on the BPSC instead of owing its blunder if any in the selection process. If the department is not ready to appoint these petitioners or compassionate the petitioners then
