JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J. In the captioned writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction to the respondents to declare the result of the petitioner and consider his case for appointment on the post of Constable from Chatra district. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing of entire selection process of appointment being violative of the order of this Court reported in 2002 (3) JCR 188 and the notification dated 10.10.2002. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents repudiating the contentions made in the writ application. In the counter affidavit it has been specifically submitted that as per the notification issued by the Home Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi on 12.11.2009 which inter alia stipulates that if the number of successful candidates are more than the number of declared posts, in that situation merit list will be prepared on the basis of the marks obtained by the candidates to their qualifications and height, as evident from Annexure-A to the counter affidavit. It has further been submitted that as per the master chart with regard to the petitioner it is evident that petitioner is matriculate and for this qualification, six marks were given to him and his height was found 169 cm. and for this seven marks has been given to him and the total 13 marks has been given to the petitioner. During course of selection process, not a single candidate was selected securing less than 14 marks and in this view of the matter, the petitioner could not be declared successful. It has further been submitted that during selection process reservation principles of the Government has been adhered to. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for interference due to the following facts and reasons: (I) In pursuance to advertisement bearing No.01/2004 dated 13.01.2004 in the daily newspaper ‘Hindustan’ the applications were invited and the petitioner along with others appeared in the recruitment process and total 13 marks has been given to the petitioner including the marks obtained for height and the last selected candidate secured 14 marks and not a single candidate was selected below 14 marks, therefore, the name of the petitioner did not find place in the select list. In that view of the matter the grievance of the petitioner is not legally tenable. Apart from that fresh advertisement has been published and in the meantime one decade has elapsed. It is settled position of law that inclusion of name in the select list, does not confer indefeasible right to the petitioners for appointment. But in the instant case, name of the petitioner does not figure in the select list, so there absolutely no infirmity, illegality and perversity on the part of the respondents not to select the petitioner on the said post. 4. In that view of the matter this Court is not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit.