WP(C) 5864/2009 2011BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA.. The claim of the petitioner is that the Respondent No.8 was appointed as an Anganwadi Worker though she is not a resident of the Anganwadi Centre in que stion. As per the affidavit filed by the Respondent No.7, the Respondent No.8 w as selected as Anganwadi Worker as she had secured 50.4 marks in the selection a s against 49.4 marks secured by the petitioner. It has been denied that the Resp ondent No.8 is not a resident of the Anganwadi Centre in question. In this conne ction, the certificate dated 10.9.2009 has been referred to. According to the petitioner, the certificate, on which the Respondent No .7 has placed reliance, is a fake certificate. In this connection, she has refer red to the stand taken in Misc. Case No.2505/2010. Above being the disputed question of fact, the writ Court cannot decide as to whether the Respondent No.8 is a resident of the Anganwadi Centre in quest ion. If the petitioner is aggrieved by appointment of the Respondent No.8 on the ground of being not a resident of the Anganwadi Centre in question, it will be appropriate for her to file an appropriate representation before the Director of Social Welfare, Assam, who in turn shall decide the matter upon hearing all the parties involved. With the above direction and observation, the writ petition is disposed of.