WP(C) 9506/2003 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. Z Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. PS, learned Stat e Counsel, Assam. The petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the appointment of the re spondent No. 6 herein as Anganwadi Worker at Gomaijhar Muslimpara Anganwadi Cent re under the Child Development Project Officer, Jaleswar Goalpara (hereinafter f or short referred to as the Centre). According to her, she had been appointed as Anganwadi helper in the aforementioned centre on 25.02.2002. The petitioner has contended that on 08.08.2003 and 14.08.2003 she submitted representations befor e the Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Jaleswar, Gournagar, Goal para, respondent No. 5 for her promotion/upgradation to the post of Anganwadi wo rker having regard to her unblemished service as Anganwadi Helper. While her rep resentations were thus pending, the respondent No. 6 was appointed without any i nterview and selection denying her preferential claim for promotion to the said post. Being aggrieved, she is before this Court. In her additional-affidavit, the petitioner has brought on record a letter No.SW D.107/2007/pt./4, dated 23.10.2007 of the Deputy Secretary, Government of Assam, Social Welfare Department, Dispur addressed to the Director, Social Welfare Ass am, Uzanbazar, Guwahati, requiring the latter to take appropriate steps for fill ing up the post of Anganwadi worker, where the incumbent of the said post vacate s the same, by the Anganwadi helper of the said centre who had been continuously working thereat, if possessed of requisite qualifications. Mr. Hussain has submitted that as the petitioner in terms of the letter dated 23 .10.2007 ought to have been considered for promotion to the post of Anganwadi wo rker in the aforementioned centre, the appointment of the respondent No. 6 is pa tently illegal and ought to be interfered with. Mr. Deka, on the other hand, submits that in absence of the appointment letter o f the respondent No. 6 on record, the challenge is untenable, more particularly, as the pleaded facts are inadequate to conclude that the said appointment is ot herwise illegal. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the materials on record, this Court at this distant point of time, is not inclined t o interfere with the appointment of the respondent No. 6. This is more so, in ab sence of any interim restraint on her appointment. Noticeably, eight years have passed in between. This notwithstanding, as attention of this Court has been dra wn to the letter dated 23.10.2007 and it has been pleaded on oath that the petit ioner’s representations at all relevant times had been pending, the Child Develo pment Project Officer, ICDS Project, Jaleswar, Gournagar, Goalpara, respondent N o. 5 would dispose of the same on merits on a consideration of all relevant fact s and in accordance with law. This should be done within a period of four (4) we eks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated as observed hereinabove on the validity or otherwise of the appointment of the respondent No. 6 and the res pondent No. 5 would be free to pass appropriate order(s) as deemed fit and prope r. The petition stands disposed in the above terms. No costs.