Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner applied for appointment as Constable (GD) in Para Military Force under the advertisement issued by the Staff Selection Commission for the examination of 2011.
(2.) THE petitioner's case is that he has wrongly been denied appointment by the respondents even after securing 48 marks while the candidates having secured 42 to 46 marks have been selected. It is evident from the pleading and documents on records in the writ petition as well as the counter affidavit of the respondents that applications were processed for filling up the post of Constable (GD) in Para Military Force i.e. Assam Rifles, ITBP, CRPF, CISF, BSF, SSB etc. There was a definite procedure under the said recruitment in which applicants were required to exercise their preference for a particular Para Military Force. The petitioner did not admittedly give any preference for any Para Military Force. The respondents have processed the results for preparation of a merit list in two categories; firstly, a select list in which such applicants, who exercised their option, All India Merit List has been prepared and appointments have been made in different para military forces from the said list. The other list is of such candidates, who have not given any preferences at all. The case of the petitioner falls in the reserve list as he had not given any option or preference. The petitioner has compared himself with the candidates, who have given preference and have been appointed from the select list for such candidates.
(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the respondents, it is evident that the petitioner got 48 marks while in the unreserved category, reserve list candidates, who have been appointed in BSF, CISF, CRPF and SSB got 65, 76, 67 and 62 marks respectively. Since the petitioner did not obtain more than cut off marks for the respective para military forces from the reserve list, the respondents have not given appointment to the petitioner. Having considered the related procedure laid down for preparation of such list as would appear from the counter affidavit and also the facts of the petitioner's case, it is evident that no discrimination has been made in the case of the petitioner, who had obtained lesser marks than other candidates, who have been appointed from the said reserve list. No ground for any interference is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.;