IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 5640 of 2024 ----- Anju Kumari, W/o Lalan Ram, R/o Village- Nimachak, P.O. & P.S. Panki, District Palamau, Jharkhand ------ Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.The Principal Secretary, School Education and Literacy, Government of Jharkhand 3.Deputy Commissioner, Palamau, P.O. & P.S. Medninagar, District- Palamau 4.District Superintendent of Education, Palamau at Samaharalay Campus (c) Block P.O. and P.S.- Medninagar, District- Palamau ------ Respondent(s) …… CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, S.C.-IV …...... 04 / 09.01.2025: It is the case of the petitioner that in the final merit list of 2019, the petitioner was called for counselling and merit list was prepared, but she was not appointed on the ground that she was Commerce Graduate, which has got no equivalence with the Social Science subject. 2. The issue as to whether the Commerce Graduate can be treated at par with graduate of Social Science subject, was set at rest by this Court in L.P.A. No.122 of 2020 and other analogous cases. Pursuant to the said order all the Commerce Graduate was also called for counselling treating them to be at par with the Social Science Graduate. Thereafter, a fresh counselling was held by virtue of order of this Hon’ble Court. The petitioner was not called for counselling thus, the petitioner has approached this Court praying therein to include her in the process of counselling. She also submitted an application/ representation. 3. Learned counsel for the State submits that petitioner has obtained 63.216 marks, whereas the last selected candidate in the category of the petitioner, which is Scheduled Castes non-para, had obtained 63.604 marks. It is the specific case that no one who has obtained marks below 63.604 has been appointed in the category Scheduled Castes non-para and since the petitioner has received less marks than the last selected candidates, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief. 4. After hearing the parties, after going through the counter affidavit and the writ petition, I find that it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has obtained 63.216 marks. It is also admitted fact that she is in the Scheduled Castes non-para category. There is specific affidavit by the State that in the aforesaid category, the last person selected has obtained 63.604 marks. There is nothing to suggest that any person, who has obtained less marks than the petitioner, has been appointed. 5. Considering the aforesaid situation wherein the last selected candidate has obtained more marks than the petitioner, no relief can be grated to the petitioner in the instant writ petition. She, on the aforesaid fact has no right to be considered for appointment. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S.