WP(C) 5855/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. M. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B. K. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Social Welfare Department. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the select ion and appointment of the respondentNo.6 as Anganwadi Worker in No. 9 Dabpara B aripara Anganwadi Centre. According to the petitioner, she having had better aca demic record than the respondent No.6, the Selection Committee ought to have sel ected her in preference to the respondent No.6. It is the stand of the petitione r that she having secured 45% marks in her HSLC examination compared to the resp ondent No.6 securing 36.67% marks, she ought to have been preferred over the sai d respondent No.6. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been stated th at the selection being comprised of both academic records and the interview, the petitioner cannot leave aside her performance in the interview. In this connect ion, in the affidavit, it has been disclosed that while the petitioner secured 1 2.6 marks in the interview, the respondent No. 6 secured 21.8 marks. Thus, takin g altogether the marks obtained in the HSLC and the interview, the respondent No . 6 scored higher marks over the petitioner by securing 58.47 marks. On the othe r hand, the petitioner secured 57.6 marks in aggregate. The petitioner has not challenged the process of the selection by allegi ng any malafide and / or arbitrariness on the part of the members of the Selecti on Committee. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and acc ordingly the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.