As per case facts, OPSC advertised for Dental Surgeons. After a written exam, initial answer keys were found erroneous. An expert committee corrected them, leading to revised cut-off marks. Respondents, ... initially eligible, fell below the revised cut-off and were not recommended, while some less meritorious candidates were appointed during the process. The Single Judge ordered OPSC to recommend Respondents, deeming the cut-off revision as changing the rules of the game and discriminatory. OPSC appealed. The question arose whether revising cut-off marks due to answer key corrections constitutes an impermissible change in selection rules and if the appointment of less meritorious candidates during the process entitles the Respondents to relief based on legitimate expectation. Finally, the Court ruled that correcting answer keys and revising cut-offs is not changing the rules of the game but correcting errors. However, it found the selective appointment of less meritorious candidates arbitrary. To restore parity without unsettling existing appointments, the Court directed OPSC to accommodate the two Respondents prospectively against existing vacancies. An inquiry was also ordered against erring officials for a 'closed-door exercise' with costs.