ORDER : Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 2. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to appoint him to the post of Constable in Jharkhand Armed Police (JAP) under E.B.C.-I Category. 3. The factual exposition as has been delineated in the instant writ petition is that in light of letters dated 01.05.2015 and 09.07.2015, issued by Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, applications were invited vide Annexure-1 to the writ petition for appointment to the post of Constable. The candidates under various categories had to fulfil requisite criteria for appointment. Petitioner had applied for the post under the Backward Caste-I (BC-I) category and after issuance of admit card, he appeared in the written test on scheduled date and time and duly qualified the same as his name finds place in the result declared by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission. As per the official website, petitioner had obtained 159 marks whereas the cut off marks for the most Backward Category-I (MBC) was fixed at 143. Thereafter, pursuant to the official notice issued by respondent no. 5 on the website, petitioner appeared alongwith his certificates for verification of his credentials on 28.12.2016. Grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of fulfilling requisite criteria and in spite of qualifying under the Most Backward Category-I, he has not been issued appointment letter. 4. Mr. Rupesh Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously urges that petitioner has been declared successful in the selection process and has acquired more marks than the minimum cut-off marks prescribed for E.B.C.-I category and has also been successful in physical and medical tests for the purpose of said appointment and as such, he cannot be denied appointment without any reasonable ground. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner was duly called along with entire certificates for verification of his credentials but without any rhyme or reason he has not been issued appointment letter. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner was duly called along with entire certificates for verification of his credentials but without any rhyme or reason he has not been issued appointment letter. Learned counsel further draws attention of this Court towards Annexure-8 to the supplementary affidavit and submits that while relying on Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2016) 4 SCC 754 , this Court passed the order dated 22.02.2018 in W.P.(S) No. 271 of 2016 and held that action of the respondents cannot be said to be justified where the concerned petitioner had submitted his Caste Certificate subsequently but prior to finalization of the Select List. Learned counsel submits that it is an admitted position that neither any of the certificates of the petitioner has been questioned nor he has been declared unsuccessful on any other counts such as written test, medical test or physical test. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner throughout belonged to EBC-I Category and as such he cannot be denied benefits of reservation in the garb of non-submission of certificate in a prescribed format. Action of the respondents is illegal, malafide and fit to be interfered. 5. Per contra, counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 5 – Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission. Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 5 vehemently opposes the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that mere issuance of Admit Card does not give any right for appointment and Commission, after conducting examination, verifies testimonials of the candidates and after verification of the same Commission takes final decision about eligibility of a candidate. The candidature of an individual can be rejected at any moment. Learned counsel further submits that from perusal of Clause-8 of the advertisement, it is clear that reserve category candidates who claimed reservation, were required to submit their Caste Certificate issued by an officer not below the rank of Sub-divisional Officer in a proforma as indicated in Prospectus. Learned counsel has further drawn attention towards para-23 of the counter affidavit and submits that on the date of verification of documents i.e. 28.12.2016, petitioner could not submit Caste Certificate of E.B.C-I in the prescribed proforma as per requirement. Learned counsel has further drawn attention towards para-23 of the counter affidavit and submits that on the date of verification of documents i.e. 28.12.2016, petitioner could not submit Caste Certificate of E.B.C-I in the prescribed proforma as per requirement. The Caste Certificate of O.B.C. submitted by the petitioner was for the post under the Government of India, which was not valid in terms of advertisement and as such, petitioner was placed in unreserved category. Since petitioner had secured 159 marks whereas the recommended candidate under the unreserved category for appointment to the post of constable in JAP had secured 175 marks and as such petitioner was not recommended for appointment to the post of Constable in JAP. In absence of submission of Caste Certificate in prescribed proforma, a candidate cannot claim reservation and as such, this writ petition is devoid of any merits and fit to be dismissed. 6. Counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of respondent no. 2. Mr. Samir Sahay, AC to learned AG submits that the Jharkhand Constable Competitive Examination, 2015 has been conducted by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission and Department has to act on the recommendation of the Commission. Learned counsel submits that the State respondents have no role to play in recommending names of successful candidates for appointment. 7. Be that as it may, having gone through records of the case and after hearing arguments advanced by counsel for the respective parties, I see no reason to entertain this writ petition and this writ petition merits dismissal. The candidates have to fulfil the requisite criteria and have to produce the documents in the prescribed format as per the advertisement. It is not the case that the petitioner did not qualify under the reserved category but it is the case that the petitioner could not establish his case for reservation under the particular category due to non-submission of the certificate issued by the competent authority. The petitioners had applied against the reserved seat and as such he had to submit the certificates under the specific formats prescribed by the Commission but the petitioner could not submit the Caste Certificate in the format prescribed by the Commission. Similar view has been taken by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 169 of 2015 [Rishi Kumar Vs. Jharkhand Public Service Commission and others]. Similar view has been taken by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 169 of 2015 [Rishi Kumar Vs. Jharkhand Public Service Commission and others]. This Court has also taken similar view while rejecting case of Ravi Kumar Bhatt Vs. The State of Jharkhand in W.P.(S) No. 2975 of 2017. 8. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid rules, guidelines, legal proposition, I find no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed.