WP(C) 2774/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. B. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R . Chakraborty, learned State Counsel. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a directio n to the respondents to appoint him in the Assam Forest Protection Force as Cons table pursuant to his purported selection conducted for the purpose. According t o the petitioner, he had appeared in the selection in all the tests and in the r esult sheet, he was shown passed under Roll No. 27016. Although, he was not issu ed with any appointment order, the petitioner claims that he was allowed to join his duties. Thereafter he was asked to go back with the assurance that appointm ent order would be issued. However, no such appointment order was issued. Hence, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been stated th at the petitioner belonged to OBC category, had secured 49 marks in aggregate (P ET-27 + Viva-voce 22). The last candidate belonging to the said category i.e. OB C/MOBC, who was selected and appointed, secured 56 marks. Thus, the petitioner s ecuring 49 marks was not within the zone of consideration for appointment. Howev er, due to some typographical errors, his Roll Number was wrongly published on 1 2.2.2011 in place of Roll No. 27106 belonging to one Shri Deben Kutum, who was s elected in order of merit, securing 61 marks in ST(P) category. As soon as, the matter was brought to the notice of the authority, a corrigendum was issued on 1 5.2.2011 in two dailies, namely, The Assam Tribune and Janasadharan. In the writ petition, the petitioner has not even obliquely stated about the aforesaid corrigendum dated 15.2.2011 and has also not disputed the stand o f the respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition by filing any reply affidavi t. The petitioner cannot claim appointment on the basis of a typographical err or, as a result of which his Roll No. was included in place of Roll. No. 27106 b elonging to another candidate, who had secured 61 marks as against 49 marks secu red by the petitioner. The aforesaid factual position being an admitted one, no relief can be g ranted to the petitioner and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.