WP(C) 5310/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. Talukdar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Huda, learned Cen tral Government Counsel for the official respondents. The facts in short leading to the filing of the instant petition are to be sketched. The petitioner, pursuant to an advertisement published in t he SSB Website for recruitment of Constable (GD) in its organisation had offered his candidature. After processing his testimonials, admit card was accordingly issued and he participated in the selection in various constituents segments in seriatim as hereinbelow:- (a) Physical Test, (b) Measurement of Physical parameters, (c) Written Examination and (d) Medical Examination. After the completion of the process, a select list of the successful candidates in unreserved as well as reserved categories was published in which the name of the petitioner, an unreserved candidate, did not figure. The advertisement provi ded the following break up of the vacancies. Sl. No. (1) State Code (2) Name of State/Uts Vac. Allotted for SC (3) ST (4) OBC (5) Gen. (6) Total (7) 3 04 Assam Entire State (Militancy affected) Border Baksa, Chira ng, Kokrajhar and Udalguri Total 08 03 11 13 04 17 28 09 37 57 18 75 106 34 140 As would be apparent from hereinabove, 57 posts were earmarked t o be filled up by General Category candidates for the Non-Border areas and 18 fo r the Border Areas i.e. Baksa, Chirang, Kokrajhar and Udalguri. Being aggrieved by his non-selection, the petitioner is before this Court seeking redress. The respondents in their affidavit have in essence taken the sta nd that in order to short list the meritorious candidates belonging to General C ategory, cut off marks of 60 has been prescribed and as the petitioner secured 5 7, he was not accommodated in the list of selected candidates. In compliance of the order dated 18/1/2011 of this Court, Ms. Hu da has produced the relevant extracts of the official records, a perusal whereof affirms the stand of the respondents that the petitioner bearing Roll No. 04090 7000340 has secured 57 marks. There is no wrangle at the Bar that the petitioner is a General Category candidate. On being queried by this Court, the learned Co unsel for the petitioner has admitted that the cut off mark of 60 has been presc ribed by the respondents for such candidates to qualify for selection. In the above view of the matter, the respondents pleaded stand h aving been adequately borne out by the relevant records, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner’s challenge does not merit acceptance. The petition thus l acks in substance and is therefore dismissed. No costs.