2025:JHHC:25839 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.4401 of 2025 ------ Satyanarayan Kumar, S/o Bharat Saw, R/o: At-Jugra PO: Chepakalan via-Barkagaon, PS: Barkagaon, District-Hazaribagh, State-Jharkhand. … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Principal Secretary, Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Department, Government of Jharkhand at Project Building, Dhurwa, PO- Dhurwa, PS- Jagannathpur, Dist. Ranchi. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand at Project Building, Dhurwa, PO- Dhurwa, PS- Jagannathpur, Dist. Ranchi. 3. The Director, Department of School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand at Project Building, Dhurwa, PO- Dhurwa, PS- Jagannathpur, Dist. Ranchi. 4. The Chairman, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, PO & PS: Namkum, Dist.-Ranchi. 5. The Secretary, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, PO & PS: Namkum, Dist.-Ranchi. 6. The Examination Controller, Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission, Ranchi at Kali Nagar, Chai Bagan, PO & PS: Namkum, Dist.-Ranchi. … … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. Komal Tiwary, AC to AG Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Prince Kumar, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Jay Prakash, Advocate ------ 02/ 28th August,2025 Heard the parties. 2. In the writ petitioner, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “A. For issuance of writ/writ(s), order/order(s) or direction/direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the post of Sahayak Acharya (Class 6 to 8) and publish result for the post of Sahayak Acharya (Class 6 to 8) as the petitioner has participated in the recruitment process and appeared in the written examination which was conducted by the respondent- Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission pursuant to Advertisement No.13/2023 considering the fact that the petitioner is fulfilling the requisite qualification to be appointed as Sahayak Acharya teacher for Class 6 to 8 but inspite of that the petitioner has not been called for document verification which is illegal and arbitrary decision and also against the Rules of Advertisement No.13/2023. B. For issuance of writ/writ(s), order/order(s) or direction/direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus 2025:JHHC:25839 2 directing the respondent Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission to publish result of the petitioner as per merit and issue appointment letter thereafter; C. For issuance of writ/writ(s), order/order(s) or direction/direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Jharkhand Staff Selection Commission to disclose reason for not calling the petitioner for document verification; D. For issuance of writ/writ(s), order/order(s) or direction/direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent concerned to reserve 1 post for petitioner till disposal of the present writ application. E. For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s) or direction(s) or Order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of this case for doing equitable and conscionable justice to the petitioner.” 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was not called for the document verification, even though as per the petitioner, he has obtained more than the qualifying marks. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-JSSC submits that the results were published but the same was returned by the department for fresh publication considering the circular of the Government, now the respondents have to publish the result afresh. He further submits that there are several litigations pending for which also it will take some time to publish the final results. 5. Merely getting more marks than the qualifying marks does not give any right to a person to be appointed. No one has a fundamental right to be appointed. There are other factors also which is to be seen. In the instant case, the final results are yet to be re-published as per law, after taking into consideration circulars of the Government. After final publication of the results when recommendation is made, if it is seen that the petitioner’s name is not there in the final list or any person obtaining lesser marks than the petitioner has been recommended, then only the petitioner will get a right to challenge the same. 6. In view of the aforesaid facts, I hold that this writ petition is pre-mature. 7. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court once the final result is published. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Sandeep, cp2