ORDER Heard Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.B. Sinha, learned Standing Counsel No-10. 2. The petitionel has prayed for issuance of directions upon the respondents to appoint him on the post of Jharookash Jamadar pursuant to the advertisement dated 8.8.1998, issued by the Commandant, Bihar Military Police, Battalion No. 18, Bodh Gaya. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the advertisement dated 8.8.1998 and also the notice displayed on the notice-board dated 14.8.1998 the petitioner alone turned up before the authorities for interview on 29.8.1999. On that day he was interviewed, but the matter was kept pending and no decision was taken in the matter for filling up the post of Jharookash Jamadars. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner was the sole candidate before the Interview Board for the post of Jharookash Jamadar, ordinarily he could have been selected unless he was found otherwise unfit for the post. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents it is stated that since the petitioner did not secure the requisite qualifying marks in oral test, he was not selected. It is further stated that the post Jharookash Jamadar is still vacant in B.M.P. 18, Bodh Gaya. 5. Learned counsel for the State, however, could not justify as to what was the criterian for fixing certain marks for oral test. No relevant rules have been brought to my notice prescribing qualifying marks for oral test for Class-IV post. 6. Learned counsel for the State now submits that the Commandant has sought for roster clearance for this post from the Divisional Commissioner on 10.4.2003 but the same is still awaited. 7. For single post, in my opinion, there is no question of reservation and roster clearance. The authorities, therefore, could have proceeded to take a decision in accordance with law. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was the sole candidate who had turned up for intervi6w on 29.8.1999 for the post of Jharookash Jamadar. It is also not in dispute that the post of Jharookash Jamadar is still vacant. 9. The authorities, therefore, could have proceeded to take a decision in accordance with law. 8. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was the sole candidate who had turned up for intervi6w on 29.8.1999 for the post of Jharookash Jamadar. It is also not in dispute that the post of Jharookash Jamadar is still vacant. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and for the reasons afore-mentioned, respondent no.5, the Commandant, Bihar Military Police-18, Bodh Gaya, is directed to re-consider the case of the petitioner for his appointment on the post of Jharookash Jamadar, pursuant to the advertisement dated 8.9.1998 and to pass necessary appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy, pf this order. 10. Whit this direction/observation, this writ application is disposed of.