WP(C) 475/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA.. Heard Mr. B.N. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms R . Chakraborty, learned State counsel. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a directi on to the respondents to appoint him as a Process Server (Jarikarak) pursuant t o the advertisement dated 22.12.2010 by which 4 (four) posts of Jarikarak have b een advertised. As per the advertisement, the candidate must not be less than 1 8 years or more than 38 years of age as on 1st January,2010, which is relaxable by 5 years in case of SC/ST candidates. As per own declaration of the petitione r in the affidavit that filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner is 50 years of age on the date of filing the affidavit dated 27.1.2011. If that b e so, the petitioner is not eligible to apply for the said post. Apart from the above, the whole basis of the claim of the petitioner is that he was appointed temporarily against leave vacancies for certain spells in the year 1993-95. His such temporary appointments were as a Jarikarak. It appea rs that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing a writ petiti on being WP(C) No.3344/2000, which was disposed of by order dated 2.9.2005 provi ding liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority for appointme nt against notified vacancy. It was provided that the authority may consider the relaxation of age. Even if the age is relaxed to the extent of 5 years, the petitioner cann ot make it to the eligibility zone as per the age prescription in the advertisem ent. Merely because the petitioner had rendered services against leave vacancies for certain spells during the period from 1993 to 1995, he does not have any ri ght for appointment dehors the recruitment rules. For all the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petit ion and accordingly, it is dismissed.