Judgment :- I.P. Mukerji, J. I notice a very disturbing trend. Some people are trying to misuse the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A typical example is this case. Candidates who did not qualify in the 2012 selection process for recruitment of Medical Officers (School Health) under the Adolescent Health Programme of RCH (Reproductive Child Health) of the Health and Family Welfare Samity, under the Government of West Bengal have filed this writ application challenging the process. The State Health and Family Welfare Samity was constituted under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961, for the purpose of proper planning, implementation and supervision of all the National Health and Public Health Programmes undertaken under the policies of the Ministry of Health, Government of India. This society conducted this recruitment process. In this writ application, 17 such unsuccessful candidates have challenged the selection. They want the court to become the selection board. The court should, according to them, go into the results of each and every candidate and make a fresh declaration of results. Some of the selected candidates have put in several months of service. Even then, this body of persons wants the whole selection process to be overturned so that a re-look is made into their selection. The writ petitioners are all Bachelor of Homoeopathic Medicine and Surgery (BHMS). On 2nd August, 2012 the Executive Director of West Bengal State Health and Family Welfare Samity published a recruitment notice for inter alia filling up 752 posts of Medical Officer (School Health) from graduates in homoeopathic science and surgery and allied discipline. Out of 752 posts, 356 were reserved for lady doctors, 166 for Scheduled Caste, 45 for Scheduled Tribe, 76 for OBC-A, 53 for OBC-B and 412 for General category candidates. There was district wise distribution of seats. The age limit was 40 years, as on 1st January, 2012 with the provision for relaxation of qualifying age for candidates with higher qualification and longer experience. There was special provision for relaxation of age for SC/ST/OBC candidates. The respondent No.3 received a total number of 5000 online applications for 752 vacancies. On the basis of the above cut-off marks, a primary selection list was prepared on 18th October, 2012. Verification of documents of these candidates was to be made on 19th October, 2012. There was special provision for relaxation of age for SC/ST/OBC candidates. The respondent No.3 received a total number of 5000 online applications for 752 vacancies. On the basis of the above cut-off marks, a primary selection list was prepared on 18th October, 2012. Verification of documents of these candidates was to be made on 19th October, 2012. The scale of scoring and cut-off marks were declared on 1st November, 2012. The final list of selected candidates was published on 28th December, 2012. This scale of scoring showed how much weightage was given to marks obtained by a candidate in their academic results, in the Madhyamik, graduation and Post-graduate examination. An earlier writ (W.P. No.28368(w) of 2012) Mollah Khairul Basar & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. was heard, in my court, challenging this selection process. It was made by three unsuccessful candidates. Two grounds taken in that writ application were successful. The first ground was that weightage could not be given to post-graduate qualification in homoeopathy because possession of a post-graduate qualification was not one of the eligibility criteria. For something which was not an eligibility criterion, weightage could not be given. Furthermore, it appeared that the cut-off marks had been set by the Samity after the examination was held. That point also found favour with this court because all the terms and conditions of the selection process had to be open at the time of publication of advertisement of the recruitment process. New terms and conditions setting eligibility criteria could not be imposed after the candidates had written their examination. In those circumstances, that writ application was disposed of by a judgment and order dated 1st October, 2013 on the following terms:- “In those circumstances, I am of the opinion that the standards adopted by the West Bengal State Health and Family Welfare Samiti in preparing the final list were not quite correct. But any how, since the list was finalized and selected candidates have started working, I am not disturbing the list. More so, none is before the Court challenging it except the three writ petitioners. By an interim order passed in this writ, three posts were directed to be kept vacant, which I am told, have been kept vacant. Therefore, the case of the writ petitioners needs reconsideration without, in any way, disturbing the fate of the candidates already selected. More so, none is before the Court challenging it except the three writ petitioners. By an interim order passed in this writ, three posts were directed to be kept vacant, which I am told, have been kept vacant. Therefore, the case of the writ petitioners needs reconsideration without, in any way, disturbing the fate of the candidates already selected. In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ application by passing the following directions:- (i) The West Bengal State Health and Family Welfare Samiti will first of all determine whether the cut off mark was fixed before or after publication of the advertisement. If the cut off mark was fixed before publication of the advertisement, then reliance can be placed on the cut off mark to publish the list of qualifying candidates. If not, no reliance can be placed on the cut off marks. (ii) The above Samiti will prepare a fresh scale of scoring based on the above observations. (iii) The above Samiti will prepare a fresh list of successful candidates based on the revised scale of scoring and cut off mark, if any. (iv) If the writ petitioners qualify as per this list, OBC- A candidates, they will be selected and appointment letters granted accordingly. (v)The above exercise will in no way affect the already selected candidates, as they are not parties herein. (vi) The three seats kept vacant will be filled up in accordance with the results of the above exercise. Compliance is to be effected within three months of communication of this order”. A subsequent review application for review of the said judgment and order was disposed of by this court by clarifying its earlier judgment and order to the effect that marks obtained in post-graduate examination and cut-off marks had to be ignored. A fresh notional list of candidates had to be prepared. If the three writ petitioners in that writ qualified, in that notional list in the same way as the successful candidates, they should be appointed. For example, if there were 100 general category vacancies the rank of the three writ petitioners, assuming they were general category candidates had to be within 100 in the said list. They were to be appointed without disturbing the appointments of already selected candidates. This was so because the selected candidates were not represented in the writ. For example, if there were 100 general category vacancies the rank of the three writ petitioners, assuming they were general category candidates had to be within 100 in the said list. They were to be appointed without disturbing the appointments of already selected candidates. This was so because the selected candidates were not represented in the writ. Pursuant to the above advertisement the present writ petitioners made online applications. A list of candidate was published in the website of the Department of Health and Family Welfare Samity. The candidates were called for verification of their original documents by the third respondent. None of the 17 writ petitioners qualified. Comes to the details the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 17 have the qualification of BHMS and belong to the general category. They scored 57, 62, 60, 61, 62, 59, 62, 62, 59, 57 marks in the selection process and could not qualify having lesser than the cut-off marks of 64. The petitioner No.4 belongs to the SC male category. He scored 54 marks. He could not qualify as the marks were lesser than 57 in the said category. The petitioner Nos.8 and 9 belong to the BHMS general/female category. They scored 61 and 57 respectively but could not qualify as their marks were less than the cut- off marks of 62. The petitioner Nos.15 and 17 belong to the BHMS/Male/OBC- B category and scored 49 and 54 respectively below the cut-off marks of 60. All the posts were filled up as reflected in the chart below:- “CHART” There remained 83 vacancies which have since been transferred to the number of vacancies to be filled up by the new selection process, as submitted by Mr. Dutta learned senior advocate. The writ petitioners have challenged the selection process on several grounds. Their grievance is that a district wise successful list of candidates has not been published. Secondly, extra weightage was given to candidates possessing the Master’s degree when there was no such stipulation in the eligibility criteria. If the selection process had been carried out, according to the stipulations in the notice of recruitment, then the candidates would have had a very fair chance of succeeding. As far as district wise selection is concerned, I find that in the recruitment notice posts of Medical Officer (School Health) allotted to each and every district is mentioned. If the selection process had been carried out, according to the stipulations in the notice of recruitment, then the candidates would have had a very fair chance of succeeding. As far as district wise selection is concerned, I find that in the recruitment notice posts of Medical Officer (School Health) allotted to each and every district is mentioned. It is as follows:- “TABLE” The writ petitioners are not content with this. They want district wise selection and posting according to the place of residence of the candidates. Mr. Nayak appearing for the petitioners placed the Guidelines for Preparation of Annual Programme Implementation Plan National Rural Health Mission for 2013 and 2014. He referred to guidelines 3.13 which stated that there should be “Decentralized recruitment”. He argued that the Samity had no power to make a centralized selection. In my opinion, this point is worthless. The idea of “Decentralized recruitment” under the chairpersonship of the District Collector/Rogi Kalyan Samitis is just a guideline of the National Ministry. If the West Bengal government thought that the recruitment process would be more effectively carried out by the West Bengal State Health and Family Welfare Samity, the process cannot be faulted on the ground that it did not follow the guidelines of the Central Government. The State Government has the exclusive power to initiate a recruitment process. If in that recruitment process, there was this deviation from the national guideline, it did not vitiate the process. More so because the recruitment policy adopted by the State government is more rational. It provides for centralized selection of candidates and, thereafter, the selected candidates are posted in various districts according to the allocation of posts in the districts. Therefore, this point is rejected. In a supplementary affidavit affirmed by the first writ petitioner on 21st January, 2014, he stated that, having made an enquiry under the Right to Information Act, 2005, he learnt that the total existing vacancies with regard to the posts for which the recruitment notice dated 2nd August, 2012 was issued, were 61. In the affidavit-in reply to the said supplementary affidavit affirmed on behalf of the third respondent, it was admitted that with regard to the said recruitment process there were 82 vacancies out of which 41 vacancies were for males and 41 for females. This was due to the non-filling up of Scheduled Tribe vacancies, non-joining and resignation of appointed candidates. In the affidavit-in reply to the said supplementary affidavit affirmed on behalf of the third respondent, it was admitted that with regard to the said recruitment process there were 82 vacancies out of which 41 vacancies were for males and 41 for females. This was due to the non-filling up of Scheduled Tribe vacancies, non-joining and resignation of appointed candidates. The fresh recruitment process for Medical Officers (Ayush) was started by a notice dated 9th December, 2013. These vacancies were transferred to the total number of sanctioned posts for that recruitment process. The number of sanctioned posts was 882. After addition of 82, 964 posts were created. With reference to the next point I observed during hearing of this application that the extra weightage placed upon post-graduate candidates and stipulating cut-off marks after the examination were not proper when the eligibility criteria was a bachelor’s degree. Thereupon, I enquired of Mr. Dutta learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents whether it would be possible for the respondents to re-assess the marks of the writ petitioners on the basis of my judgment in the case of W.P. No.28368(w) of 2012 Mollah Khairul Basar & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. decided on 1st October, 2013. Mr. Dutta answered in the affirmative. He and the department re-assessed the marks of all the candidates by not taking into account the extra 20 marks for postgraduate qualifications and the cut-off marks. On the basis of my judgment in W.P. No.28368 (w) of 2012 Mollah Khairul Basar & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. delivered on 1st October, 2013 and the clarification made to that judgment on 11th July, 2014 in a review application (RVW 15 of 2014), the West Bengal Health and Family Welfare Samity prepared a status report of the petitioners. This status report is according to a revised merit list excluding 20 marks allotted for post-graduate qualification. It was in the form of a chart and appended to the reply of the respondents to the said supplementary affidavit. In this chart, the score of the candidate, the merit serial number, the number of sanctioned posts and the score of the last selected candidate were indicated. For each and every writ petitioner except 6 and 7 whose records could not be found, the data against each and every heading above was indicated in columns and rows. In this chart, the score of the candidate, the merit serial number, the number of sanctioned posts and the score of the last selected candidate were indicated. For each and every writ petitioner except 6 and 7 whose records could not be found, the data against each and every heading above was indicated in columns and rows. It is quite plain on a perusal of this chart that each and every writ petitioner whose marks was tabulated was way off the marks or ranking required to qualify. Seen in more detail even after the revised assessment excluding the cut-off marks and the weightage of 20 marks for post-graduation the petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17 being BHMS/Male general category candidates students rank 500, 295, 520, 408, 287, 779, 326, 324, 562, 563 respectively as against total sanctioned posts of 165 for such candidates. The petitioner No.4 being a male SC candidate student secured merit serial No.214, as against a total of 66 sanctioned posts. The petitioner Nos.8 and 9 being BHMS/Female/General category candidates secured merit serial No.277 and 61 respectively as against total sanctioned posts of 165 of that category. The petitioner Nos.15 and 16 being BHMS/Male/OBC-B category candidates are in merit serial No.249 and 180 respectively as against total sanctioned posts of 21. When does the court interfere in a selection process in this kind? It interferes if there is palpable irregularity. Say, for example, candidates who are eligible and have filled up the form are not allowed to sit for the examination by force. The court will interfere if the selection process is made a mockery by large scale leakage of examination papers. It may also interfere if it is clearly shown that the method of marking was absolutely perverse. A most deserving candidate did not get the due marks whereas a most undeserving one got adequate marks to qualify in the examination or if it is established that eligibility criteria were fixed in such a way so as to exclude one class of candidates so that another class was favoured. The court’s powers to declare a selection process as invalid can be invoked by a person, who can demonstrate that there is illegality staring on the face of the selection process, it is tainted with fraud or vitiated by arbitrariness, discrimination, mala fide and so on. The court’s powers to declare a selection process as invalid can be invoked by a person, who can demonstrate that there is illegality staring on the face of the selection process, it is tainted with fraud or vitiated by arbitrariness, discrimination, mala fide and so on. Nothing of the kind could be shown in this case. That just because vacancies were not filled up in the last recruitment process they should be filled up by the writ petitioners, would produce very unjust results. Then in that case, qualification in a selection process is given a go by. A candidate is favoured just because he is a litigant. If these 17 candidates are accommodated in the 83 vacancies, it would be very unfair to those disqualified candidates who did not come to court. Secondly, it would also unfairly affect the results of the new selection process which is underway. Really eligible candidates will be disadvantaged if the court adopts such a measure. Additionally, the court does not even think of re-visiting the entire selection process for two reasons. First, the successful candidates are not parties to this writ application. No order could be passed without making them a party and hearing them. Secondly, the successful candidates have enjoyed about two years of service. Even if one or two candidates have been improperly selected it would be most unfair and prejudicial the other successful candidates by throwing open the selection process. This court was of the view that if these 17 candidates qualified in the revised assessment, in that event, without disturbing the appointments of the existing candidates, they could be appointed to fill up the 83 vacancies still remaining. For example, if by the revised assessment the 17 candidates or some of them qualified to get a rank amongst 752 candidates, then, these 17 candidates or any of them could be appointed in the 83 vacancies. If a candidate was a general category candidate he had to qualify to be within 412, if the candidate was a lady, she had to qualify to be within 356. If it were a case where the writ petitioners or any of them were marginally short of the target the court may have considered that they had a real likelihood of qualifying in the examination process and accordingly given them some relief. But here it is out of the question. If it were a case where the writ petitioners or any of them were marginally short of the target the court may have considered that they had a real likelihood of qualifying in the examination process and accordingly given them some relief. But here it is out of the question. The present litigation is absolutely speculative and vexatious. These 17 writ petitioners did not even have an outside chance of qualifying in the selection process. They have tried, by this writ, to disturb the selection of deserving candidates. This kind of an attitude is most unfortunate and detrimental to the health of our nation. For those reasons, this writ application is dismissed. No order as to costs.