Judgment Ravi S.Dhavan, J. 1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment on CWJC No. 6568 of 1995 dated 8 April, 1996. While the appellants have not been able to make out a clear cut case that a writ ought to have been granted on the writ petition, the Court cannot help in observing that the pleadings made by the State were hap hazard, slip-shod and without responsibility. 2. The State appears to have contradicted itself between the vacancy it accepts and later which were not available to be filled up by certain orders of the High Court. 3. In so far as the petitioners-appellants are concerned they did make a back door entry. The same posts were directed to be advertised under the orders of the High Court. Thereafter, the issue gets enlarged. Within the forest department certain posts were to be filled from outside candidates also. Relevant merits between outside candidates and internal candidates were to be considered. If outside candidate did not fill up the posts and these posts were left vacant, the petitioners-appellants could have been considered. 4. There were outside candidates who virtually edged out the petitioners-appellants. Then, in so far as merits a[e concerned, the named petitioners failed in internal efficiency tests. There is no denial of this. At the time when the controversy was raised the issue was to fill posts of range clerks and divisional clerks. Certain projects were closed. The petitioners were vying for the posts of divisional clerks. Certain activities of the forest department were merged into the Bihar State Forest Corporation. The contention of the petitioners-appellants in the rejoinder-affidavit was that they ought to have been absorbed on posts within the Bihar State Forest Corporation. Now, this was a complete change of case. 5. Between the Government orders which has been generated on behalf of the State Department, it is bundle of contradictions, for instance, the Government order issued at Daltonganj dated 30 December, 1995 (Annexure 30 to the writ petition) is virtually acknowledging as if posts are available for engaging daily wagers and whether if need so arises new posts should be created and the proposal be submitted. The letter of Regional Chief Conservator of Forests, Palamau, Daltonganj, dated 12 August 1999 (Annexure 11) to LA. No. 13037 of 1999 makes no reference to the communication to the letter dated 30 December, 1995. The letter of Regional Chief Conservator of Forests, Palamau, Daltonganj, dated 12 August 1999 (Annexure 11) to LA. No. 13037 of 1999 makes no reference to the communication to the letter dated 30 December, 1995. A text of keeping certain posts alive simultaneously has been mentioned as what has been abolished. In the circumstances, it is not without reason that the learned Judge has already recorded that there have been irregularities on behalf of the authorities themselves. 6. In so far the petitioners-appellants are concerned, the Court does find that they were not such meritorious candidates over and above the rest that the Court should have carved out a relief for them. Some of them failed and all of them, in fact, their origins of entry into service was, in fact, through the back door. 7. Dismissed.