WP(C) 3005/2003 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY Heard Mr. M.H. Choudhury, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Phukan, the learned Government Advocate appears for the Deputy Commissioner , Nagaon. The respondents 1 & 2 are represented by Mr. B.K. Sarma, the learned S tanding Counsel, Social Welfare Department. 2. For disposal of these 2 writ petitions filed by the same petitioner, fac ts are taken from the WP(C) No. 8298/2003, which incorporates all the relevant f acts. 3. On 31.10.2000, the petitioner was appointed as an Anganwadi worker in No .83 Pub Larimukh Part II Anganwadi Centre under Lawkhowa ICDS Project, Nagaon and she filed the first writ petition i.e. WP(C) No. 3005/2003, to challenge the order dated 1.4.2003 (Annexure-D), whereby the service of the petitioner was di s-continued. 4. An interim order was passed on 29.4.2003 in WP(C) No. 3005/2003, whereby the respondents were restrained from appointing any person on ad hoc basis, ti ll the petitioner appears before a Selection Committee. The Court also permitted the petitioner to continue in the post. Consequently by the office order dated 30.8.2003 (Annexure-F) issued by the CDPO, Lawkhowa ICDS Project, the petitioner was allowed to continue in her post as Anganwadi worker, till regular selection is made. 5. Mr. M.H. Choudhury, the learned Counsel refers to the Notice dated 18.4. 2003 (Annexure-G), to project that name of selected candidates were notified for 4 other Anganwadi centres, whereas the selection result for the post of Anganw adi workers in No.83 Pub Larimukh Part II Anganwadi Centre was not declared pu rportedly because of the pendency of the case. The learned Counsel submits that since select list hasn’t been notified, the petitioner is entitled to continue i n terms of the interim order passed by this Court on 29.4.2003 in WP(C) No. 3005 /2003. 6. I have heard the parties and have also considered the fact that the peti tioner is serving as an Anganwadi worker since last 11 years from the year 2000. As the result of the selection is yet to be notified, the interim order passed in favour of the petitioner enables her to continue to serve as an Anganwadi wor ker. The respondents didn’t declare the selection results because of the pendenc y of the case filed by the petitioner. Therefore I feel that the liberty should be available to the respondents to declare the selection results of the No.83 Pu b Larimukh Part II Anganwadi Centre. Alternately, considering the afflux of ti me, the respondents may go for fresh selection by affording opportunity to the s erving petitioner. But it must be made clear that the service of the petitioner can’t be replaced by any ad hoc appointee. However the petitioner can’t obstruct appointment of a regularly selected candidate. It is ordered accordingly. 7. With the above direction, the 2 writ petitions are disposed of by this c ommon order.