JUDGMENT S. N. Pathak, J. - The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to immediately revised the result of Jharkhand Forest Guard Competitive Examination-2014 (Mains) with regard to the petitioner and issue appointment letter in her favour as she stands in the merit list and she has secured marks more than the last selected candidates in the District of Latehar. 2. The case of the petitioner lies in a narrow compass. An advertisement being Advertisement No. 03/2014 was floated by the Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission for appointment of Forest Guards in all the districts of Jharkhand. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner having being eligible applied for the said post under the Scheduled Tribe Category in the district of Latehar. Thereafter, she appeared in the selection process and qualified preliminary test as well as main examination. 3. Subsequently, she was called for physical and medical test, in which she has been found successful. On being successful in all the events, petitioner along with other successful candidates were called for verification of their requisite documents in which the petitioner appeared and thereafter, on the basis of merit list, final result was published, but the name of the petitioner could not find place in that list. 4. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner made an application under RTI about her result and list of finally selected candidates. Thereafter, the respondents provided marks sheet of the petitioner as well as final list of successful candidates with percentage of marks in main examination. From perusal of the marks sheet, the petitioner came to know that she has secured 466 marks in aggregate. It is specific case of the petitioner that one Anil Munda has secured only 465 marks under the same category and he was selected, but the petitioner despite securing 466 marks in aggregate was not selected without any reason. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner represented before the respondents, but no heed was paid. Having no other efficacious, speedy and alternative remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court for redressal of her grievances. 5. Mr. Amresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously argues that petitioner is entitled for appointment to the post of Forest Guard as she has qualified in all the tests. Having no other efficacious, speedy and alternative remedy, the petitioner has approached this Court for redressal of her grievances. 5. Mr. Amresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously argues that petitioner is entitled for appointment to the post of Forest Guard as she has qualified in all the tests. Learned counsel further argues that persons having lesser marks than the petitioner have been appointed to the said post and it is case of discrimination as the respondents have adopted pick and choose method. 6. Learned counsel further submits that there is reservation for women as well as Scheduled Tribe Candidates, but the respondents have not applied the same and as such, a direction may be given upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Forest Guard. 7. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed. Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner has made submissions without verifying the records, the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is totally misconceived as none of the candidates, who have obtained less marks than the petitioner has been appointed to the same post. Learned counsel draws the attention of the Court towards para 23 of the counter-affidavit in which it is mentioned that petitioner has secured less marks than the last selected candidates and as such, her case was not considered. 8. Learned counsel further submits that the percentage of marks obtained by the petitioner is 48.54166667 rounded of to 48.54 whereas, the marks of percentage of last selected candidate in her category Anil Munda is 48.58934169 rounded of to 48.59, which is ample proof to show that none of the candidates against whom the petitioner is claiming parity has been appointed to the post of Forest Guard. 9. Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that no case is made out for interference in the instant case. Admittedly, the petitioner has obtained less marks than the cut-off marks as prescribed under her category and none of the candidate, who has been secured less marks than the petitioner, has been appointed. There is no merit in this case. 10. Resultantly, the writ petition merits dismissal and is hereby dismissed.