JUDGMENT : The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents for appointment to the post of Forest Guard in the district of Koderma under the unreserved female category pursuant to the Advertisement dated 19.09.2014. 2. The short facts lying in narrow compass is that an advertisement dated 19.09.2014 was floated by the State Government for appointment to the post of Forest Guard. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner having the Degree of Bachelor in Computer Application and fulfilling the other required qualifications, applied for the same under unreserved female category in the district of Koderma. Thereafter, admit card was issued for appearing in the examination and roll number was allotted to the petitioner. In view of the said admit card, the petitioner appeared in the preliminary test, mains, physical test as well as medical test, in which the petitioners were declared successful. After qualified in all the events, the petitioner along with other candidates were directed to appear before the Commission Office at Kali Mandi, Chai Bagan, Namkum, Ranchi for verification of their certificates between 23.01.2017 to 27.01.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared before Commission's Office at Namkum, Ranchi along with the required documents on 25.01.2017. 3. It is specific case of the petitioner that though she fulfills the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of forest guard and having been declared successful in all the events, but surprisingly her name does not find place in the finally selected candidates. As the petitioner was not selected after qualifying in all the events, she has been constrained to knock the door of this Court for redressal of her grievances. 4. Mrs. Rashmi Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner strenuously argues that the respondents have illegally and arbitrary not considered the case of the petitioner though she is qualified in all the events and has been declared successful. Learned counsel further argues that still two posts are vacant in the female candidates quota and as such, a direction may be given to the respondents for consideration of the case of the petitioner and to appoint the petitioner to the post of Forest Guard. 5. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed. Mr. Sanjay Piprawal and Mr. Learned counsel further argues that still two posts are vacant in the female candidates quota and as such, a direction may be given to the respondents for consideration of the case of the petitioner and to appoint the petitioner to the post of Forest Guard. 5. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed. Mr. Sanjay Piprawal and Mr. Rishikesh Giri, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently oppose the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and draws the attention of the Court towards paragraph 25 of the counter-affidavit and submit that petitioner is BC-II Female Category Candidate and as per Appointment Rules, 2014, the minimum height i.e. 155 cm is fixed for Female Categories candidates, including B.C.-II category. It is further stated that in the physical fitness test held on 17.12.2016, the height of the petitioner was measured as 151 cm and in physical fitness report, the petitioner was declared unsuccessful candidate, but later on in the remarks column of the physical fitness certificate, the unsuccessful remarks was struck-off and petitioner was declared successful as Schedule Caste Candidate with a remark 'Certificate by SDO' however, after verification, it was found that the petitioner is having height 151 cm only whereas, minimum height required for appointment of the female category candidates was 155 cm and as such, rightly she was not appointed to the said post and there is no illegality or infirmity committed by the respondents. 6. On 15.01.2018, when the case was taken up, Mrs. Rashmi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that petitioner is having a height of 155 cm, which is minimum requirement for appointment and respondents have wrongly mentioned her height as 151 cm. On the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, a direction was given to the Civil Surgeon, Sadar Hospital, Ranchi for constitution of Medical Board for re-measurement of the height of the petitioner in presence of a Judicial Officer, duly appointed by the Judicial Commissioner of Ranchi. 7. In compliance of the said order of this Court, a report has been furnished, which is on board in which it is shown that the petitioner was examined by a team of doctors, five in numbers and the report has been counter signed by the Civil Surgeon himself. 7. In compliance of the said order of this Court, a report has been furnished, which is on board in which it is shown that the petitioner was examined by a team of doctors, five in numbers and the report has been counter signed by the Civil Surgeon himself. Report says that height of the petitioner is 153.5 cm and it is also signed by the petitioner herself on 31.01.2018 at 12:05 pm. 8. Admittedly, the minimum height required for appointment of the female candidates is 155 cm, the case of the petitioner does not fall within the zone of consideration, no appointment can be given dehors the rules. The case of the petitioner was rightly rejected by the respondents as she did not fulfill the requisite criteria for appointment to the post of Forest Guard, having her height much less then the required height. 9. In view of the earlier order passed by this Court on 15.01.2018, the amount of Rs. 2500/- before the Registrar General of the Court deposited by the petitioner is forfeited, the said amount shall be deposited before the Member Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi. The Registry is directed to deposit that amount before the Member Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi. No interference is warranted in the instant case. 10. Resultantly, the writ petition stands dismissed.