WP(C) 4567/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE A. K. GOEL HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P. K. SAIKIA This petition seeks a direction to appoint the petitioner to the post of LDA-cum -Typist in the office of the District legal Services Authority, Kokrajhar. Case of the petitioner is that he is working as Chowkidar in the office of the District & Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, since 1987. He applied for the post of LDA-cum-Typist in the office of the District Legal Services Authority, Kokra jhar, in pursuance of advertisement dated 16th May, 2005. He was duly selected, and on recommendation by the District and Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, his appoint ment was approved by the State Government on 26.10.2005. In-spite of these devel opments, the petitioner was not given a letter of appointment. On coming to know that the District and Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar may appoint some one else, this petition has been filed in the year 2010. Notice was issued and reply has been filed by the Under Secretary to the Government stating that after the grant of approval, a letter dated 19th Decemb er, 2005 was received from the District and Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, stating that selection was not as per rules. The same was followed by letter dat ed 15th June, 2006 to the effect that no formal advertisement was published, no selection board was constituted, no written test or type test was held, and the applications were invited only from the candidates of the establishment, and not from the public. Accordingly, the District & Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar was aske d to cancel the selection. An affidavit has also been filed by the District and Sessions Judge, Kok rajhar, stating that no due procedure of law was followed for the appointment an d therefore the selection was cancelled. We have heard Sri K Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D Saikia, learned Standing Counsel for the finance department. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once selection had tak en place and been duly approved by the State Government, cancellation of the sel ection was unfair and arbitrary. Learned Standing Counsel for the finance department points out that the selection itself was vitiated and the successor District & Sessions Judge, Kokra jhar, on the basis of material on record, intimated that there was no proper sel ection in absence of proper advertisement and selection process. We find that the writ petition itself has been filed five years after th e alleged selection and refusal to make appointment. Mere selection did not conf er any right on the petitioner to seek a Mandamus for appointment. In view of af fidavit of the District and Sessions Judge that there was no proper advertisemen t or selection process, cancellation of selection cannot be held to be arbitrary , so as to call for interference of this Court. Thus, we do not find any merit i n the petition and the same is dismissed.