ORDER : MOHINDER PAL, J. By way of this petition, petitioner has challenged the decision of respondent No. 2 - High Court of Gujarat in treating the petitioner disqualified in result of written examination of Peon conducted at N.B Patel College, merchant campus, Basana, District: Mehsana. 2. In pursuance to the advertisement, petitioner has applied for post of Peon (Class-IV). He filled up on-line form on 14.2.2014 and thereafter, appeared in the written examination on 6.4.2014 Thereafter, petitioner has been called for interview. However, a show cause notice came to be issued to the petitioner on 24.9.2014 stating therein that, the correct answers given by the petitioner and another candidate sitting along with the side of the petitioner were the same. The wrong answers in both the answer sheets were the same and unmatched responses numbering 10 in both the answers sheets were the same. Petitioner replied to this notice. However, as the petitioner could not be selected, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this petition. 3. Respondents have contested this petition by filing detailed reply; wherein, it has been stated that petitioner is not the only person who has violated the condition. In fact, there were 66 candidates (including the petitioner) who had violated the clear instructions more particularly, instruction No. (19), at. point No. 10 of the detailed advertisement dtd. 7.2.2014, instruction No. 14 attached to call letter, point No. 4 of the Notice dated 4.4.2014 and instruction No. 7 of the pamphlet. The same were brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Advisory Committee. It was noticed that the petitioner and candidate at Seat No. 25109942, sitting in his proximity had got 77 similarly right answers and 13 similarly wrong answers and 10 unmatched answers which were found to be more than expected similarity in terms of methodology if the candidate adopted fair means in attempting the exam. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in absence of any proof regarding copying, the petitioner was required to be placed amongst list of declared successful candidates. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that in view of violation of instructions, he has requested that petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. This Court has considered the submissions made by both the sides. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that in view of violation of instructions, he has requested that petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. This Court has considered the submissions made by both the sides. It is the case of the respondents that candidate sitting in proximity with the petitioner has given right answer to 77 questions and there were 13 wrong answers and 10 unmatched responses given by both the candidates. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondents has further pointed out that, it was one of the instructions that the candidates were not to mark anything on the question paper. However, the petitioner has put marks on the question paper. Generally, such instructions are given in order to avoid copying by the adjoining candidate. From the notice served upon the petitioner, it is clear that the petitioner has put marks on the question paper and has violated the instructions given in this regard. 7. Otherwise also, the selection pertains to the year 2014 and subsequently newly selected candidates have also joined. 8. In view of the afore-going discussion, this petition being devoid of any merits, is dismissed. Notice is discharged.