IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 2586 of 2024 ---- Ritesh Kumar Chaudhary son of Sri Bhagwat Narayan Chaudhary, resident of Village Chakeshwari, PO Dubrajpur, PS Godda, District Godda (Jharkhand). … Petitioner -versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The High Court of Jharkhand through the Registrar General at High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, PO PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. The Principal District and Sessions Judge (Appointing Authority), Civil Court, Godda, PO PS District Godda. … Respondents ---- CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kanti Kumar Ojha, Advocate Mr. Rajan Anand, Advocate Mr. Sahjanand Saraswati, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Ankit Kumar, AC to SC I ---- 6/ 08.01.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed to set aside the results and the selection of the candidates, who have been selected for the post of Driver pursuant to order No.11/Godda contained in Memo No.146-151 dated 25.01.2024 for the district of Godda pursuant to Advertisement No.1/2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was only one post of driver, as per the advertisement, but two persons have been appointed. Further, it is his contention that the post was unreserved, but surprisingly, the candidates of Scheduled Tribe have been appointed. On these grounds he prays that the results and selection of candidates be set aside. 4. After hearing the parties and going through the records, I find that Advertisement No.01/2023 was published by the District Judiciary, Godda for appointing several employees on Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ posts. One of such vacancy was for driver. Though, as per the advertisement, vacant post for driver was shown to be ‘1’, yet, admittedly, 2 (two) persons were appointed. The post was for General Category. 5. While I go through the advertisement, I find that as per Clause 11(x), it has been mentioned that number of posts in each category can increase or decrease. Since there is a specific clause in the advertisement, that the posts can increase or decrease, the plea of the petitioner that two -: 1 :- persons were appointed whereas as per the advertisement, only one post is not sustainable. Be it noted that it is not the case of any of the parties that the appointment was made beyond the vacancies. So far as reservation is concerned, post is under unreserved category. It is now well settled that in an unreserved category, meritorious candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes also can be appointed. Unreserved category does not mean that people from only General Class can be appointed against the said vacancy. If members belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes compete with General Category candidates, and are meritorious, they can also be appointed against unreserved category. There is nothing on record to suggest that there are more meritorious persons for the post of Driver in any of the category, who have not been appointed and it is only these two candidates have been given preference. 6. Considering the aforesaid position, I find no merit in this writ petition. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/Cp-02 -: 2 :-