-I SerialNo.o[OrderIo4.'' -Date'ofOrder Order with Signature O(fice Note as toaction(ifany)takenonOrder 02.04.2008 Present: Mr. A. Moulik, Senior Advocate with Mr. I N. G. Sherpa, Advocate for the I)I\I Petitioners. Mr. J: 8. Pradhan, Government Advocate for the State-Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Mr. N. Rai and Ms. Jyoti Kharga, I Ii II1(!\I III(I Advocates for Respondent No.48.Thisisawritpetitionfiledbythreepetitioners and today is the date of admission. The case of the writ petitioners is opposed by the State as the pet:ition is being moved on ncttice. The writ: petitioners were aspirants for the post:s of graduate teachers. Advertisement was issued in 2006 and in the select:ion process the writ petitioners participated without any protest but they were all unsuccessful. A point is now taken that there were two advertisements issued and the first on 16-12-2006 provided that the candidates would have to have B.Ed. qualification. A later Notification relaxed it and made the condition this, that candidates could apply without B.Ed. and their case would be considered but if they got selected they would have to get the B.Ed. qualification within five years of their appointment:. t is submitted that this relaxation is against a Notification of 2006 (annexed to the writ petition). he State Government points out that t:here is n amended Notification of 2007, whereby, bot:h or graduate and primary teaches, amendment:s (/1,4= /se,,aiNo.oforder DateofOrder Order with Signature Office Note as toaction(ifany)takenonOrder I(II Ii\ I I II(I were made exactly in line with the relaxed second advertisement. This main point in the writ petition t:here fore fails. The Court is never sympathetic with a failed candidate who comes with law points after taking the examinat:ion and failing, and who would have raised . no grievance had he or she been select:ed in the process. Several other points were attempted to be argued on behalf of the writ petitioners, but t:hese have no foundation in the writ petition as drafted. AIIowing the filing of such a writ petition as t:he present one will encourage litigiousness, which the Court:s of India cannot afford, in the present state of flood of litigation. The writ petition is not admitted and is dismissed /.n /t.mt.ne. * ( A. N. Ray, C.J.) wl (A. . ba,J.)