JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J. In the captioned writ application, the petitioners have inter alia prayed for quashing the list of successful candidates, so far it relates to the post of peon in Gram Nyayalaya, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma, by which, respondent nos. 3 and 4 have been selected though they have not applied for the said post. 2. The factual exposition, as delineated in the writ application, in brief is that pursuant to the advertisement published vide letter dated 01.11.2010 for appointment on various post, including two posts of peon in Gram Nyayalaya, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma the petitioner applied for and after going through the selection process their names were found place at serial no. 1 and 2 respectively in the merit list against the post of peon, as evident from Annexure 6 to the writ application. But, instead thereof respondent nos. 3 and 4 have been shown as successful candidates. It has further been averred that the petitioner on obtaining information under the Right to Information came to know that only two candidates appeared for the post of peon; hence the appointment of respondent no. 3 and 4 is illegal. 3. Heard Mr. Sameer Saurabh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, A.C to learned G.P. IV for the respondents-State and Mr. Gautam Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and 4. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are having all requisite qualification and they faced the selection process and on being declared successful their names were reflected in the merit list by respondent no. 2 at serial no. 1 and 2 whereas respondent no. 3 and 4 who never applied for and never participated in the selection process, as per the information furnished by the office of respondent no. 2 itself, have been selected which is totally illegal, void and arbitrary. Hence, the list of successful candidates, so far it relates to the post of peon in Gram Nyayalaya, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma is liable to be quashed and set aside. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 submitted that a common advertisement was published in the daily local newspaper inviting application for the post of peon for Civil Court, Koderma as well as Gram Nyayalaya, Jhumari Telaiya, Koderma. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 submitted that a common advertisement was published in the daily local newspaper inviting application for the post of peon for Civil Court, Koderma as well as Gram Nyayalaya, Jhumari Telaiya, Koderma. It has further been submitted that as a matter of the petitioners, who were resident of Nawada were not found fit to be considered for the post of peon; hence the Committee resolved that both the post of peon for Gram Nayayalaya, Jhumri Telaiya should be filled up amongst the suitable local candidates. Accordingly, list of successful candidates was sent for approval before the Hon'ble High Court and after getting approval from Hon'ble High Court the appointments have been made. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and 4 – the private respondents submitted that the respondent no. 3 and 4 were called for interview having their roll no. 195 and 895 and accordingly they appeared before the Selection Committee. It has further been submitted that it is true that the respondent no. 3 and 4 did not apply exclusively for peon in Gram Nayayalaya, Jhumri Tilaiya, Koderma but they applied for the post of peon in Civil Court, Koderma which was published through common advertisement and from the letter of Judge-in-Charge cum Public Information Officer, Civil Court, Koderma, it is quite apparent that the petitioners herein were not found otherwise fit to be appointed; hence respondent no. 3 and 4 were selected from the list of successful candidates for the post of peon of Civil Court, Koderma. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and on perusal of the record, it appears that a common advertisement was published for appointment on the post of peon in Civil Court, Koderma and Gram Nyayalaya, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma. Here, it is not the case that the private respondent nos. 3 and 4 did not apply and went through the selection process, as alleged by the petitioner, rather they applied for the post of peon in Civil Court, Koderma and when no suitable candidate was found for appointment in Gram Nyayalaya, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma, the respondent no. 2 after adopting due process recommended the name of respondent nos. 3 and 4 which got approval of the higher authority. This Court does not find any irregularity or illegality in appointment of respondent no. 2 after adopting due process recommended the name of respondent nos. 3 and 4 which got approval of the higher authority. This Court does not find any irregularity or illegality in appointment of respondent no. 3 and 4 and the petitioners fails to pursuade this Court on any count so as to warrant interference. 8. Accordingly, this writ application, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed.