WP(C) 4711/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY Heard Mr AK Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr DK Das, lear ned standing counsel for the BTC, appearing for the respondent Nos.2,4,5,6 & 7; and Mr MK Misra, learned standing counsel for the Education Department, appearin g for the other respondents. The petitioner, by the present petition has prayed for a direction to th e respondent authorities to regularize her services as Assistant Teacher in 233 No. Chekadani L.P. School under Gossaigaon Sub-Division in the district of Kokra jhar, contending interalia that pursuant to the order of the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Gossaigaon dated 26th May 1998 passed with the approval of the Directo r of Education, BTAD appointing her as Assistant Teacher in the said school at a remuneration of Rs.900/- per month subject to availability of fund allotment by the BAC as per the education policy prevailing at that time, she joined her ser vices and is still serving as an Assistant Teacher on honorary basis and though her case for regularization was directed to be considered by the Director of Edu cation, BTC vide communication dated 17th May 2006 nothing has been done by the District Elementary Education Officer till date. Admittedly, the engagement of the petitioner vide order dated 26th May 1 998 was without following any selection process. The petitioner’s entry into the service, which is on honorary basis, was through back-door, and her contention that she is still serving pursuant to the order dated 26th May 1998 cannot confe r any right to claim regularization in services, when the post of Assistant Teac her is required to be filled up by following the relevant recruitment rules i.e. by advertisement and initiating a selection process, which has not been done in the instant case. That being the position, no direction can be issued by the Court directi ng the respondent authorities to regularize the services of the petitioner. In view of the above, the relief claimed in the writ petition cannot be granted. The petitioner, however, when a selection process is initiated, may sub mit her application claiming benefit under the provisions of the Persons with Di sabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Ac t, 1995, as she claims to be a physically challenged person. The petitioner may also file an application seeking condonation of the upper-age limit, if at the r elevant point of time she becomes over-aged for recruitment as Assistant Teacher . In case such an application is filed, the same will definitely be considered b y the authority. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.