JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. K. D. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Dey, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. B. Sarma, learned counsel, representing the respondent No. 2, and Ms. S. Baruah, learned counsel, appearing for the Respondent No. 3. 2. The present proceeding has been instituted by the petitioner, herein, praying for the following reliefs: “ In the premises aforesaid, it is, therefore, respectfully prayed that your Lordships' would graciously be pleased to admit this petition, call for the records, calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a Writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or/any writs or order or direction of like nature shall not be issued to the respondents to disclose the final result along with merit list/comparative statements of marks of the candidates and/or setting aside and quash the Result dated 07.06.2024 declared by the Principal Controller of Examinations, Assam Public Service Commission, select the actual eligible candidate for appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian in view of the Advertisement No.10/2023 dated 12.04.2023 (Annexure-C). And Pending for disposal of this petition, it is further prayed that as a measure of interim relief, Your Lordships' may pass such order or direction restraining the Respondents authority to appoint in the post of Assistant Librarian in view of the Advertisement No.10/2023 dated 12.04.2023 (Annexure-C).” 3. The Assam Public Service Commission(APSC) on a requisition made to it for conducting the recruitment process for recruitment against 2(two) posts of Assistant Archivist and 1(one) post of Assistant Librarian in the Directorate of Archives, Assam, had issued an advertisement, vide Advertisement No. 10/2023, dated 12-04-2023, putting up the said posts for recruitment. The petitioner, herein, being eligible for recruitment against the post of Assistant Librarian lying vacant in the Directorate of Archives, Assam, submitted his application, complete in all respects, in pursuance of the advertisement, dated 12-04-2023. The petitioner, thereafter, participated in the recruitment process along with 41 other candidates including the Respondent No. 3, herein. On conclusion of the selection process, the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) authorities published the result of the selection process vide its select list, dated 07-06-2024 and therein, reflected the name of the Respondent No. 3, herein, as the selected candidate. The petitioner, thereafter, participated in the recruitment process along with 41 other candidates including the Respondent No. 3, herein. On conclusion of the selection process, the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) authorities published the result of the selection process vide its select list, dated 07-06-2024 and therein, reflected the name of the Respondent No. 3, herein, as the selected candidate. The petitioner, thereafter, approached the SPIO, Assam Public Service Commission(APSC), by invoking the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005, seeking information with regard to the marks obtained by the candidates appearing in the said selection process and also the educational qualifications possessed by them. The SPIO, Assam Public Service Commission (APSC), vide communication, dated 14-08-2024, replied to the application submitted by the petitioner under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, and to the question No. 2, posed therein, submitted that the candidates were shortlisted as per the qualification mentioned in the advertisement, in question. With regard to the merit positions obtained by the candidates participating in the selection process, it was contended that the said information would not be permissible to be furnished to the petitioner, herein, in terms of the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. 4. Being agreed, the petitioner, herein, has instituted the present proceeding, praying for the reliefs, as noticed hereinabove. 5. Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner, has reiterated the facts as noticed hereinabove and has submitted that the non-disclosure of information to the petitioner, herein, under the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005, had prevented the petitioner from presenting a challenge to the selection of the Respondent No. 3, herein. Accordingly, the learned counsel has further submitted that transparency not being maintained by the Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) authorities in the matter; the selection of the Respondent No. 3, would mandate an interference from this Court. 6. Per contra, Mr. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the Assam Public Service Commission(APSC), has submitted that in the selection held for the post of Assistant Librarian, Directorate of Archives; the petitioner had secured 8 th position amongst the 12(twelve) candidates appearing in the selection process. 6. Per contra, Mr. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the Assam Public Service Commission(APSC), has submitted that in the selection held for the post of Assistant Librarian, Directorate of Archives; the petitioner had secured 8 th position amongst the 12(twelve) candidates appearing in the selection process. The learned counsel has further submitted that the Respondent No. 3, herein, had secured the highest marks in the selection process and accordingly, she was placed in the select list and her name came to be recommended to the Government for her appointment against the said post of Assistant Librarian. 7. Mr. Dey, learned counsel appearing for the respondents Assam Public Service Commission(APSC), has submitted that the educational qualifications possessed by the candidates participating in the selection process, were disclosed in the website of the Assam Public Service Commission(APSC) and accordingly, the petitioner was in the know-how of the same. The learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner having not assailed the selection of the Respondent No. 3, by raising cogent grounds; the said prayer of the petitioner, herein, would not mandate an acceptance from this Court. 8. I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 9. The first relief sought for by the petitioner, in the present proceeding, is for the disclosure of the marks obtained by the candidates in the selection process. The authorities of the Assam Public Service Commission(APSC) have in their written statement brought on record a communication, dated 16-09- 2024, issued to the petitioner, wherein, the marks secured by him and the position secured by him in the selection process was disclosed to him. It was further contended in the said communication that the marks secured by the other candidates appearing in the selection process, would be so furnished to the petitioner after receiving the written consent of the candidates involved in the matter. On receiving the written consent from the candidates concerned, the marks secured by the candidates were furnished to the petitioner vide communication, dated 14-11-2024. Accordingly, the grievance raised by the petitioner, herein, of not being furnished with the marks of the candidates participating in the selection process involved, stood redressed. 10. On receiving the written consent from the candidates concerned, the marks secured by the candidates were furnished to the petitioner vide communication, dated 14-11-2024. Accordingly, the grievance raised by the petitioner, herein, of not being furnished with the marks of the candidates participating in the selection process involved, stood redressed. 10. With regard to the prayer of the petitioner for setting aside and quashing the selection of the Respondent No. 3, herein, this Court notices that the petitioner, in the instant writ petition, has not brought on record any materials to dispute such selection of the Respondent No. 3. The result sheet of the selection process was published on 07-06-2024 and therein, the name of the Respondent No. 3 was so recommended, basing on the merit position secured by her in the selection process. 11. A perusal of the communication, dated 14-11-2024, issued to the petitioner by the Assam Public Service Commission(APSC) authorities, would go to reveal that in the selection process involved, the Respondent No. 3, herein, had secured 82 marks placing her at Serial No. 1. The petitioner, herein, on the other hand, had secured only 75 marks placing him at Serial No. 8 amongst the candidates interviewed in the selection process. Accordingly, the petitioner not having secured the requisite marks for being placed at Serial No. 1, there would arise no occasion for this Court to interfere with the selection and consequential appointment of the Respondent No. 3. Moreover, no material has been brought on record by the petitioner to demonstrate that the Respondent No. 3, herein, was not so selected in the manner prescribed. 12. In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition is held to be devoid of any merit and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.