IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2305 of 2009 Santosh Kumar Pandey & Ors . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- 3. 11.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The 19 petitioners are stated to have been applicant under Advertisement No. 1 of 2004 for the post of Constable from the Sahabad range District-Bhojpur. Their grievance was that notwithstanding that they were successful candidates and the availability of seats they have been denied appointment even after counseling. Counter affidavit has been field on behalf of the respondents. It states that petitioners 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15 and 16 have been appointed in their respective categories. In so far as the other writ petitioners are concerned, it is stated that they were found to have marks less than the cut off marks or with a date of birth lesser than those appointed in the same category with similar marks. The Court is satisfied by the very factum of the appointment of some of the writ petitioners that the respondents have applied their mind to the controversy and have acted appropriately in not granting appointment to those who have been found ineligible. 2 There is no vested right to appointment in a candidate who may have been called for counseling only. Once the respondents have given reasons in the counter affidavit and the reasons appear to be justified from the criteria for selection, there is no occasion for the Court to dwell any further in the matter. The writ petition is therefore disposed as infructuous with regard to those who have been appointed and dismissed with regard to those who have been denied appointment for the specified reasons. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)