IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10054 of 2005 YUGALKISHOR SINGH Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 5 31.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is aggrieved because despite his selection and his name figuring in the panel of candidates who appeared for appointment on the post of constable ( General Duty) in C.R.P.F. he was not given offer letter by the respondents. Petitioner apprehends that all has not been well in the recruitment of various candidates and has given certain instances and example to show or at least cast doubt over the recruitment process by stating that there are certain roll numbers which have figured in the waiting list when they were not part and parcel of the merit list. It is also alleged that some people had been accommodated even though they did not have adequate marks in this regard. Based on the averments and statements the respondents were directed to file counter affidavit and explain the situation. One thing which the respondents have categorically stated is that the petitioner had secured 50 marks in aggregate and the list of the candidates including one in the waiting list got appointment who had got 52 marks, which may be close call for a petitioner but then such are the situations which always emerge in the competitive examination. They have also explained in detail the so called discrepancy pointed out by the petitioner with regard to three roll numbers. The explanations are there available in - 2 - paragraph-6 of the counter affidavit. The respondents also produced the original result for perusal. The assertion made and the explanation offered in the counter affidavit does match with the original result. If certain discrepancy had crept in the publication of the result with regard to the roll numbers in the news papers which does cause certain apprehension in the mind of the candidates but then such publication in the news papers is always subject to the final verification of the result with the original declaration. In the above facts and circumstances the petitioner has not made out a case for direction upon the respondents for offering him appointment on the post in question. The apprehension expressed by the petitioner though made but are not made out in view of the above. This writ application has no merit and it is accordingly dismissed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)