WP(C) 4935/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. A Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. BJ Ghosh, learne d State Counsel, Assam for the respondents. The petitioner who claims to have been verbally appointed to serve as Extra-Writ er/Grade-III in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Bilasipara, is before this Cour t being driven by the apprehension that in the process initiated by the advertis ement dated 04.08.2010, issued by the Inspector General of Registration, Assam, for appointment to the vacant post of Extra-Writer as referred to therein she wo uld not be accorded due weightage of her past services and experience. According to her, though she had been serving in the above capacity without any blemish s ince the year 2001, her repeated representations for regularization of her servi ce have fallen into deaf ears. She thus apprehends that her case would not be ap propriately considered on the present occasion as well. Though, the respondents have not yet filed their affidavit, they have furnished Mr. Ghosh with the para wise comments, which inter alia, disclose their denial of her verbal appointment as Extra-Writer by the Sub-Registrar, Bilasipara, in the year 2001. Though, the y have not denied the participation of the petitioner in the ongoing selection p rocess, according to them, she is not entitled to any special weightage for not having acquired any right to that effect on the basis of her illegal and non est appointment. Mr. Hussain, in course of the arguments, while reiterating the pleaded stand of the petitioner, has drawn the attention of this Court to an undated notice requi ring her to appear in the dictation test in connection with the selection of Ext ra-Writer scheduled to be held on 11.11.2010. The learned counsel has urged that as the petitioner had been rendering her services since last nine (9) years, an appropriate direction ought to be issued to extend due weightage on that count while assessing her suitability for the aforementioned post. Mr. Ghosh, in reply has urged that as the petitioner’s claim for appointment as Extra-Writer on verbal orders is wholly unfounded, her claim for weightage on th e ground of past services and experience is misconceived. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the p leaded facts as well as the documents available on record, this Court considers it expedient to close this petition with the observation that the respondents wh ile making the final selection for appointment to the post of Extra-Writer as ad vertised, would duly take into consideration the candidature and performance of the petitioner thereat and take an appropriate decision on that count. As, admit tedly, the petitioner has no order of appointment as Extra-Writer and her claim for appointment verbally has been denied by the respondents, her request for wei ghtage cannot be entertained by this Court. It would be up to the concerned auth orities in their discretion and dominion to take a decision in this regard. The petition stands disposed in the above terms. No costs.