JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J.(Oral)-Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent-State decided to fill up 661 posts of Forest Guards in the Forest Department, out of which 79 posts were allotted to Mandi Forest Circle vide letter dated 20.4.2007. The posts were advertised in various newspapers. Physical efficiency test was conducted by the Recruitment Committee with effect from 14.5.2007 to 26.5.2007 and 2.6.2007. Written test was conducted on 5.8.2007. Personality test was conducted with effect from 24.9.2007 to 26.9.2007. Petitioner appeared for physical efficiency test on 15.5.2007. He secured 11.5 marks out of 25. He appeared for written test on 5.8.2007 and secured 41.25 marks out of 60. He appeared for personality test and secured 5.25 marks out of 15. He secured 59 marks out of 100. Petitioner was not selected. 2. Mr. R.L. Chaudhary has vehemently argued that petitioner has been allotted very low marks in the interview. He also contended that one of the candidates bearing chest No.2033 though lower in rank was selected. 3. Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that petitioner could not find place in the merit list and the method adopted for filling up the posts of Forest Guards was transparent. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. 5. Petitioner has not arrayed the candidates, who were selected pursuant to the selection. Selected candidates were necessary parties. Petitioner secured 41.25 marks out of 69 in written test and 11.5 marks out of 25 in physical efficiency test. He has been allotted 5.25 marks out of 15 in personality test. Petitioner has neither added selected candidates nor has alleged any mala fides against the Selection Committee. Petitioner’s suitability has been adjudged by a duly constituted committee. In view of this, the Court will not sit over appeal on the recommendations made by the Selection Committee. 6. Now, as far as candidate, who has been allotted chest No. 2033 is concerned, it has come in the reply that he was not selected and his name was inadvertently shown in daily newspaper “Divya Himachal” on 2.10.2007. Rather he could not qualify for interview. 6. Now, as far as candidate, who has been allotted chest No. 2033 is concerned, it has come in the reply that he was not selected and his name was inadvertently shown in daily newspaper “Divya Himachal” on 2.10.2007. Rather he could not qualify for interview. The Court is of the considered view that respondents have adopted time-tested procedure for filling up the posts of Forest Guards and three tests, i.e. physical efficiency test, written test and personality test were conducted by separate committees. 7. Accordingly, in view of the discussion made hereinabove, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. No costs.