WP(C) 1577/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. M. H. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. J. Patwary, learned Standing Counsel assisting Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Addl. A dvocate General for the respondents. The matter relates to appointment of Excise Constables. Although the petitioner appeared in the selection but could not qualify. The only ground on which the wr it petition has been filed is that the petitioner after publication of the resul ts has come to know that the persons who did not appear in the interview were se lected and appointed. In this connection he has named four candidates in paragra ph 2 of the writ petition. However, no material particulars have been disclosed. Moreover, the said persons are not party respondents to this proceeding. It is only on the basis of vague and indefinite statements made in paragraph 2 of the writ petition the petitioner has challenged the entire selection. Although the select list has been published, none of the selected candidates is a party respo ndent to this proceeding. On the other hand, a prayer has been made to set aside and quash the select list dated 11.02.2011. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner on the basis of the disclosures made in the writ petition. In view of the above, the writ petition stands dismissed. Under similar situation another writ petition pertaining to the same matter has been dismissed by judgment and order dated 24.3.2011 passed in W.P.(C) No. 763/ 2011 Tinkumani Sharma v. State of Assam.