1. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

                  “for issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction(s) or writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to consider and offer letter of appointment to the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher (Graduate Trained) initiated vide Advertisement No. 21/2016 (Annexure-2) by the respondent Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission while considering the marks obtained by the petitioner in the Revised Merit List published for Subject – History and Civics after the judgment in the case of Soni Kumari Vrs. State of Jharkhand.”

2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents.

3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of the fact that the petitioner has been declared successful, he has not been called for counselling, nor he has been appointed.

4. Mr. Tejo Mistry, learned counsel representing the respondent – Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission (JSSC), hands over the chart showing details of marks obtained by the petitioner and the last selected candidate.

5. After hearing the parties and going through the records and the documents handed over by learned counsel Mr. Tejo Mistry, I find that the petitioner applied for the post of Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT), History and Civics, pursuant to Advertisement No.21/2016, under Scheduled Tribes (S.T.) category.

6. The marks obtained by the petitioner in the S.T. category in the said subject is 174, whereas the last selected candidate as per the State wise merit list as on date, has obtained 204 marks, thus at this stage it is clear that the petitioner has obtained much lesser marks than the last selected candidate in the category and subject of the petitioner.

7. The chart produced by the counsel representing the JSSC, is kept on record.

8. Considering the aforesaid fact, I am of the opinion that no relief can be granted to the petitioner, as admittedly the petitioner has obtained lesser marks than the last selected candidate.

9. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed.

                  9.1. However, since it has been admitted that the appointment process is still continuing, be it noted that if in future, it is found that any person obtaining lesser marks than the petitioner in the category and subject of the petitioner as per the State wise merit list, has been appointed, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the respondent - JSSC by filing a representation showing proof that the person having lesser marks has been appointed. In that event, the JSSC will consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order.