Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to forthwith appoint the petitioner on the post of constable in pursuance to Advertisement No. 1/04, in which, he was declared successful.
(2.) The facts, in brief, is that pursuant to advertisement inviting application for appointment on the post of Constable, the petitioner applied and appeared in the examination, in which, he was declared successful in the category of Non-Home Guards. But to the utter surprise, the petitioner was not called for to appear for the physical/medical test and the candidates below in the merit list were called for such tests. Being aggrieved, the petitioner represented before the respondents-authorities but it did not evoke any response, which compelled the petitioner to knock the door of this Court for redressal of his grievances.
(3.) Repudiating the claim of the petitioner, counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, wherein it has been stated that mere inclusion of name of the petitioner in the merit list does not give any indefeasible right to the petitioner to claim appointment. Even otherwise, the merit list was prepared taking into consideration all aspects relating to applications, roll numbers, name of the candidates etc. and only those candidates were called for, who were found eligible. It has further been averred that after scrutiny of all documents the Selection Board found that the petitioner though declared himself matriculate passed but on verification he was found to have failed in matriculation as such he was declared unsuccessful vide memo dated 15.08.2005.;