JUDGMENT : ANANDA SEN, J. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “1. For issuance of appropriate writ or writs, direction or directions, order or orders commanding the concern respondents to show cause under what circumstances respondents have called the person for counseling who has got merit marks of 67.76 by passing the petitioner who has got merit marks of 69.20. 2. Further, for issuance of appropriate writ or writs, direction or directions, order or orders commanding the concern respondents to immediate call the petitioner for counseling for the post of Inter Trained Urdu Teacher as per Advt. No.1/2015 because respondents illegally not called the petitioner for counseling although the person who has got lesser merit marks than petitioner had been called for counseling.” 3. The petitioner, who has passed Alim (Hons) in Persian language in the year, 2001 and thereafter he also passed Fazil in the year 2004, appeared in the Teacher Eligibility Test and has also passed TET in the year, 2013. 4. Advertisement No.1/2015 was issued for appointment of Inter Trained Urdu Teachers from the eligible candidates, who had passed TET examination. The petitioner who has passed TET had applied for the post of Inter Trained Urdu Teachers. Merit list was published and the name of the petitioner was reflected at Serial No.74 with merit marks 69.20. It is the case of the petitioner that one person, namely, Tanveer Zaki, who was at Serial No.1 had obtained 67.76 marks. It is the case of the petitioner that without calling the petitioner, said Tanveer Zaki was called for counseling for the post of Inter Trained Urdu Teacher though the marks of the petitioner was more than said Tanveer Zaki. The petitioner alleges that illegality has been committed as a person, who has obtained less marks than the petitioner has been appointed. 5. At the very outset, I find that petitioner has not impleaded Tanveer Zaki as a respondent to this writ petition. The said Tanveer Zaki is not only a proper party, but he is a necessary party in this writ petition as if the petitioner’s prayer is accepted, then the selected candidate, Tanveer Zaki has to be ousted from the post. 6. The respondents have filed counter affidavit. The said Tanveer Zaki is not only a proper party, but he is a necessary party in this writ petition as if the petitioner’s prayer is accepted, then the selected candidate, Tanveer Zaki has to be ousted from the post. 6. The respondents have filed counter affidavit. In their counter affidavit at paragraph-9, they have stated that some calculation error occurred while calculating the marks of this petitioner. As per them, the actual PTTE marks was 1500 and not 1400. In the provisional list, the PTTE marks so far as petitioner’s calculation, was taken as 1400 and the marks of the petitioner was calculated, which was erroneous. When this error was brought to notice, the respondents rectified the error and the marks of the petitioner was recalculated and reassessed which infact is 67.38 and not 69.20. As per the respondents, marks of 69.20 was arrived at taking the basis of PTTE marks as 1400 and not 1500 which should have been. Tanveer Zaki has obtained 67.76 marks which is more than the actual marks obtained by the petitioner i.e. 67.38 marks. 7. Paragraph Nos.9 and 10 of the counter-affidavit which are as quoted hereunder:- 9. That in this regard it’s most humbly and respectfully submitted that it is worth mentioning that petitioner had observed the merit score published in the database (provisional list) in which the full score of PTTE was marked as 1400 due to typographical mistake and the score was 1147 i.e. 1147/1400-81.93 which was wrong. After rectifying this, the actual PTTE was marked as 1500 and the score as 1147 i.e. 1147/1500-76:47. Due to the above error, his overall merit was 69.20 instead of 67.38, which was rectified. 10 . That it’s clear that the score of Tanveer Zaki is higher than that of the petitioner as evident from memo no.1183 dated 20.03.2016 and as per the departmental rules, Tanveer Zaki has been selected and appointed by giving priority to his overall score.” 8. The petitioner has got no right to be appointed far or less when the selected candidate has obtained more marks than the petitioner. 9. Admittedly, from what has been observed above, the selected candidate has got more marks than the petitioner. Thus, I find no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed.