WP(C) 2174/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. SC Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. BK Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Social Welfare Department. The grievance raised in this writ petition is that the responden t No. 6 being not a resident of Bakula ’Kha’ Anganbadi Centre, she could not hav e been selected and appointed as Anganbadi Worker for the said center. According to the petitioner, she alone had appeared in the interview and accordingly she ought to have been selected being a resident of the area in which the Anganbadi Center is situated. The respondent No. 5 has filed an affidavit denying the aforesai d plea of the petitioner. It has been stated that the respondent No. 6 did well in the interview and was selected for the assignment of Anganbadi Worker. As reg ards residential status of the respondent No. 6, it has been stated that as per Annexure-A series certificates issued by jurisdictional Gaon Burha and Gaon Panc hayat, the respondent No. 6 is a resident of the area in which the Anganbadi Cen ter is situated. The petitioner has not denied the aforesaid plea of the responde nt by filing any affidavit-in-reply. In the affidavit it has also been stated th at the petitioner could not succeed in the selection and accordingly her name wa s not included in the select list. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and consequently, the writ petition is dismissed.