JUDGMENT : Sanjeev Kumar, J 1. The appellants, five in number (05), are in appeal under clause 12 of the Letters Patent against an order and judgment dated 08.03.2017 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court [‘the Writ Court’] in SWP No. 1434/2009 titled ‘Sajjad Ahmed Sohil and another vs State of Jammu and Kashmir and others. Although, the Writ Court has allowed the petition of the appellants and issued some directions, yet the appellants are not satisfied and have filed this appeal seeking the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition. 2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that pursuant to an Advertisement Notification issued by the Director General of Police, J&K for filling up the posts of Constables in IRP for the Districts of Doda, Kishtwar, and Ramban, the appellants, along with thousand others, submitted their application forms. The appellants restricted their applications to the posts of Constables reserved for District Ramban. They participated in the selection process, which comprised of outdoor tests, but did not find their names in the final select list issued by the respondents. 3. Feeling aggrieved the appellants, along with a few others, filed SWP No. 1434/2009 challenging the selection of respondents No. 4 to 81 (the private respondents) on various grounds and prayed for quashing of the entire select list of candidates prepared for the posts of Constable under the RBA category for District Ramban. The appellants also prayed for a direction to the respondents to consider them for appointment against the posts of Constable. The challenge to the select list was mounted primarily on the ground that some of the candidates, like respondents No. 15, 53 and 65, were given more marks than they actually deserved as per the selection criteria fixed by the Selection Committee. The appellants have found fault with the manner in which the height of respondents No. 15, 53, and 65, was measured to the benefit of aforesaid candidates. The appellant No.5, along with Sajjad Ahmed Sohil, whose name has already been struck off from the array of the appellants, also claimed benefit of two additional points for possessing the additional qualification. The writ petition was contested by the official respondents . 4. The appellant No.5, along with Sajjad Ahmed Sohil, whose name has already been struck off from the array of the appellants, also claimed benefit of two additional points for possessing the additional qualification. The writ petition was contested by the official respondents . 4. The Writ Court, having considered the case projected by the appellants and the reply submitted thereto by the official respondents, came to the conclusion that the height of the appellants was required to be measured afresh and that the additional qualification possessed by Sajjad Ahmed Sohil who was the petitioner No.1 in the writ petition, was also required to be taken into account for awarding additional marks. The Writ Court, thus, disposed of the petition vide impugned order and judgment dated 08.03.2017 with the following directions: “(i) That the respondents shall get the height of the petitioners measured by District Medical Board and shall award them proper marks on account of their height as per the selection criteria; (ii) The respondents shall take into account the additional qualification of petitioner No.1 and shall award him appropriate marks for the additional qualification; and, (iii) in case it is found that the petitioners have secured more marks than the last selected candidate in their respective categories, appropriate action for their appointment shall be taken within a period of one month from today. 5. It is this order and judgment dated 08.03.2017 passed in SWP No1434/2009 which is subject matter of challenge in this appeal. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the considered opinion that the judgment passed by the Writ Court is legally perfect and unquestionable on any count, particularly on the grounds urged before us by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants. 7. The only grievance that was projected before the Writ Court to throw challenge to the selection of respondents 15, 53 and 65 was that their height had been erroneously measured by the official respondents to confer wrongful benefit upon them. However, this allegation made was only in the air without there being any material placed on record to substantiate it. In the absence of any mala fides alleged against the Selection Committee which conducted the measurements of the candidates, it is difficult for any Court to believe the bald assertion of the appellants. However, this allegation made was only in the air without there being any material placed on record to substantiate it. In the absence of any mala fides alleged against the Selection Committee which conducted the measurements of the candidates, it is difficult for any Court to believe the bald assertion of the appellants. The appellants had also raised a grievance with regard to their own measurement of height, alleging that it was erroneously measured to their disadvantage. The writ Court has accepted this plea of the appellants and, in terms of the direction No.1, directed the official respondents to get the height of the appellants measured afresh by the District Medical Board and to award them proper marks on account of their height as per the selection criteria. This direction passed by the writ Court has already been carried out, and the re-measurement of the appellants has been conducted. The respondents have found some variation in the measurement, but have come to the conclusion that the variation found has not resulted in any increase in the merit of the appellants. 8. The other grievance which was projected by the appellants before the Writ Court was that the writ petitioner Sajjad Ahmd Sohil, and appellant No.5 herein, were possessing Diploma qualification in addition to the minimum qualification of 10+2 and, therefore, were entitled to two additional points for the additional qualification as per the selection criteria. With regard to writ petitioner No.1, namely Sajjad Ahmed Sohil, the writ Court has already directed the official respondents to take into account his additional qualification and award him proper marks. As a matter of fact, the respondents have, in compliance with the direction No.2, added two additional points for the additional qualification of Diploma qualification possessed by Sajjad Ahmed Sohil, and selected him. It is because of this reason, appellant No.1 Sajjad Ahmed Sohil has withdrawn from the array of the appellants. 9. Insofar as appellant No.5 is concerned, the re-measurement of his height has not brought about any change in his merit. Regarding his additional qualification, appellant No.5 claims to be in possession of one-year certificate course from some institute which, on the face of it, is not recognized by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir. 9. Insofar as appellant No.5 is concerned, the re-measurement of his height has not brought about any change in his merit. Regarding his additional qualification, appellant No.5 claims to be in possession of one-year certificate course from some institute which, on the face of it, is not recognized by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir. Our attention was drawn to the additional qualification claimed by appellant No.5, a perusal whereof, clearly indicates that the Diploma in the computer course has been awarded by Antarrashtriya Computer Saksharta Abhiyan, a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The Diploma does not even bear the registration number of the Society. That apart, the Diploma does not have any recognition from the Government of Jammu and Kashmir and affiliation with the Board of School Education or the Board of Technical Education. Such qualification cannot, therefore, be considered to be an additional qualification possessed by the appellant No.5. The official respondents have rightly not given any additional points to appellant No.5 for the aforesaid additional qualification. On the other hand, the official respondents gave two additional marks to Sajjad Ahmed Sohil, writ petitioner No.1 as the Diploma qualification possessed by him was from a recognized institute. 10. During the pendency of this appeal, the judgment passed by the Writ Court came to be implemented by the official respondents vide order No. 1498 of 2020 dated 13.05.2020 issued by the Director General of Police, J&K, and order No. 3550 of 2020 dated 29.12.2020. Upon reconsideration and re-measurement of the appellants, only Sajjad Ahmed Sohil, the writ petitioner No.1, was found eligible for selection. In the case of the other appellants, there was no change in their merit and, therefore, their previous position was maintained. 11. For the foregoing reasons, we are not inclined to interfere with the judgment of the writ Court, which, otherwise has already been implemented. The appeal is, therefore, found to be without any merit. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. Interim directions, if any, shall stand vacated.