1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Petitioner has approached this Court with prayer for a direction upon the respondents to issue appointment letter in his favour for the post of Forest Guard and allow him to join his duties in pursuance to advertisement no. 03/2014. Further prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to pass order for verification of the documents which was submitted by the petitioner before the authority concerned with regard to appointment of Forest Guard after completion of all selection process in connection with Advertisement No. 03/2014.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts which are requisite to be stated are that the pursuant to the advertisement no. 03/2014, vacancy was published for appointment of Forest Guard in all the Districts of Jharkhand. The petitioner claims to have qualified and passed PT as well as Mains Examination, pursuant to the said advertisement but when the results were published by the respondents, the petitioner was surprised to find that his name was not there in the list of successful candidates. On 27.01.2017, candidates of Palamau district were called in the JSSC Office with their original certificates for verification, the petitioner had also gone to the office to know the reasons for his elimination but the respondents did not disclose any reason to him. When the petitioner sought information under Right to Information Action, the Public Information Officer vide his letter dated 02.03.2017 replied that since the said examination is in process, he cannot supply the information until the results are published. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the 1st Appellate Authority under Right to Information Act on 17.04.2017 after publication of result on 07.04.2017. The 1st Appellate Authority vide his letter dated 07.06.2017 replied that as the petitioner had flat foot so he was not selected for the post of Forest Guard. Hence, this writ petition has been filed. .

4. Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel strenuously urges that the respondents have deliberately tried to stop the petitioner from joining service. In preparation of merit list, the rules regarding appointment of Forest Guard have been given a complete go-bye. Learned counsel further submits that the medical test conducted by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer is not in accordance with the standard procedure which is used by the Indian Army. After appearing before the Medical Board, the petitioner went to Sadar Hospital at Daltonganj and under the supervision of the Medical Superintendent, the “Wet Test” of the petitioner was conducted according to the guidelines laid by the Indian Armed Forces & he was surprised to find that he has normal foot & will be able to conduct his duties normally as a Forest Guard.

5. Learned Counsel further submitted that it is specific case of the petitioner that his signature was obtained on the blank papers and the medical report prepared by the respondents, were never shown to him. Learned Counsel further submitted that the merit list based on the medical certificates issued by the respondents were disputed by the petitioner and as such the same could not be taken into consideration and the petitioner got himself examined by the experts who declared him medically fit. Learned Counsel emphatically submitted that the merit list prepared for appointment of Forest Guard is dehors the rules and as such fit to be quashed and set aside and fresh merit list should be prepared taking into account that the petitioner has been declared successful and there was no occasion to declare him medically unfit. Learned Counsel also draws attention of this Court towards Resolution of the respondents authorities contained in Resolution No. 4068, Dated 04.09.2014 and further submitted that under the said Resolution, the eligibility criteria for selection has been provided. Learned Counsel further laid stress on Rule 10