ORDER : 1. The petitioner, who was declared a successful candidate for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher in “Oriya” language when finally not appointed, has come to this Court by filing this writ-petition. 2. Heard. 3. By an Advertisement issued on 12.10.2011 vide Advertisement No.93/2011, applications were invited for appointment of Assistant Teachers in “Oriya”. Total number of posts advertised was 12. The petitioner duly submitted his application and he was declared successful under BC Category. His name appeared at Sl.No.1 under the BC Category in the result published on 24.10.2014. Subsequently, the result was revised by the respondent-Jharkhand Academic Council and a fresh result was published on 18.03.2015, in which petitioner's name does not find place as a successful candidate. This gave a cause of action to the petitioner to approach this Court. 4. Mr. Manoj Tandon, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the total number of posts was advertised, it has to be construed in law that it was on account of a conscious decision taken by the authorities and after the result was published, subsequently on a pretention that there was some calculation error, the number of vacancies cannot be reduced. Referring to Resolution dated 17.02.2009 and the stand taken in the affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents, the learned counsel submits that by any calculation, 12 posts must be earmarked for direct recruit candidates, out of which one post shall go to the candidate under BC Category. 5. Per contra, Mr. Kr.Rahul Kamlesh, the learned State counsel relying on the Resolution dated 17.02.2009 submits that appointment can be made of a BC Category candidate only if there are 12 posts for appointment by direct recruitment. Referring to Annexure-1 to the Resolution dated 17.02.2009, the learned State counsel submits that as per the Reservation Roster, the 4th post shall go to the Extremely Backward Category candidate which has duly been given to such a candidate. Only the 12th post would go to B.C Category candidate. 6. In the counter-affidavit, the respondents have not denied that the result was published initially by the JAC on 24.10.2014, which was subsequently revised on 18.03.2015. A break-up of total number of posts category-wise has been given by the respondents. Only the 12th post would go to B.C Category candidate. 6. In the counter-affidavit, the respondents have not denied that the result was published initially by the JAC on 24.10.2014, which was subsequently revised on 18.03.2015. A break-up of total number of posts category-wise has been given by the respondents. The respondents have pleaded that 25% posts shall be reserved for the appointment by promotion and only 74% posts, out of total number of 15 vacancies, can be filled up by direct recruitment pursuant to Advertisement no.93/2011. The break-up of posts pleaded by the respondent-State reveals that 6 posts for General Category candidates, one post for OBC Grade-I, one for S.C and 3 for S.T Category candidates were earmarked. This has been done as per reservation-roster. The respondents have pleaded that when it was found that there shall be only 11 posts which can be filled up by direct recruitment pursuant to Advertisement no.93/2011, the said error was corrected and accordingly, appointment was not offered to the petitioner. Pursuant to order dated 22.11.2016, the Director, Secondary Education, Jharkhand has filed an affidavit asserting that in 338 High Schools, only 15 posts of Assistant Teachers in “Oriya” have been sanctioned, out of which, in terms of Clause 7.5 of Jharkhand State Secondary School Service Rules, 2004, 25% posts shall be filled up by promotion and 1% post shall be filled up from eligible Clerks of Government Secondary Schools. The rest 74% posts has to be filled up by direct recruitment. There is no dispute in respect of total number of posts, i.e., 15. Now, if 74% posts has to go to the direct recruit candidates, by a simple calculation it would be 11.25. The respondents have, thus, rightly calculated 11 posts only for direct recruits. Referring to Resolution dated 17.02.2009, the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has tried to contend that since 6% posts shall go to BC Category candidates which would be 0.66%, and accordingly, being more than 0.5%, one post shall go to a BC Category candidate. I am unable to accept such a calculation for the simple reason that it would not solve the problem rather, it would lead to further complications. By Resolution dated 17.02.2009, 8% posts has been reserved for Extremely Backward Category candidates and 26% posts for Scheduled Tribe candidates. I am unable to accept such a calculation for the simple reason that it would not solve the problem rather, it would lead to further complications. By Resolution dated 17.02.2009, 8% posts has been reserved for Extremely Backward Category candidates and 26% posts for Scheduled Tribe candidates. Now, if the calculation as proposed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted for the other two categories also, it would come in fraction and thus, total number of posts that must be filled up by that calculation would exceed the total number of actual posts. 7. Finding no merit in the writ-petition, it stands dismissed.