JUDGMENT/ORDER : Ajit Singh, J. This intra court appeal is directed against the order dated 24.5.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby he has dismissed appellants WP (C) No.5561/2016. 2. On 1.6.2016, North Eastern India Ayurveda Research Institute published an advertisement for filling up 10 posts of Pharmacist. The selection and appointment was to be made through Walk-in-Interview of the candidates. In the advertisement, it was clearly mentioned that the age limit of the candidates shall be maximum 30 years, subject to relaxation in case of SC/ST/OBC candidates, as per Government Rules. The advertisement also stated that posts of Pharmacist will be filled up initially for a period of 6 months, which may be curtailed or extended at the discretion of the competent authority and their engagement will be co-terminus. The advertisement further stated that the engagement will be purely on contractual basis with no right to claim for continuous or regular appointment. The appellants belong to general category and despite being aged much beyond 30 years, they through All Assam Ayurvedic Pharmacist Association forced Respondent No.3 to allow them to appear in the interview under a threat of disrupting the interview. Not only this, they even created a serious law and order problem due to which Respondent No.3 was constrained to call police officials along with the Central Reserve Police Force to control the situation. In the interview, as many as 48 candidates participated and the names of appellants in the select list dated 20.8.2013 for 10 posts were shown at Serial Nos.1, 3, 5 and 6. And later, in a corrected merit list dated 3.9.2016 the names of appellants were dropped, because they were over-aged and not eligible. Aggrieved, the appellants filed WP (C) 5561/2016, which the learned Single Judge has dismissed by the impugned order. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we also find ourselves in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. Admittedly, the appellants were aged much beyond 30 years and hence were not eligible for the advertised posts of Pharmacist. Also their conduct of forcing themselves in Walk-in-Interview by creating law and order problem is wholly unacceptable in a civilized society. In fact, their conduct was very disturbing and we deprecate the same. Admittedly, the appellants were aged much beyond 30 years and hence were not eligible for the advertised posts of Pharmacist. Also their conduct of forcing themselves in Walk-in-Interview by creating law and order problem is wholly unacceptable in a civilized society. In fact, their conduct was very disturbing and we deprecate the same. We also appreciate the decision of the respondents to delete the names of appellants from the select list dated 20.8.2016 by publishing a corrected merit list dated 3.9.2016. 4. The appeal has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.