WP(C) 4078/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA The petitioner, who was an aspirant for the post of Office Assistant und er the respondent No.3, for which Annexure-6 advertisement dated 21.5.2009 was i ssued. In paragraph 9 of the writ petition, the petitioner has stated thus :- ’9. That the petitioner begs to state that your humble petitioner gone throu gh the copies received from the Information office where it is reveals that priv ate respondent No. 5 and 6 are appointed in general category whose age cross the upper age limit. On the other hand private respondent No. 7 have not appeared i n the interview. As for their selection and appointment are illegal and ought to be suspended by this court till disposal this petition. That your petitioner cr aves leave of this Hon’ble Court to produce the above said documents at the time of hearing. Heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel, Health. Considering the nature of the grievance raised, this writ petition is di sposed of providing that the petitioner may approach the respondent No.3 by fill ing of appropriate representation. In the event of making the representation rai sing the grievances, as has been raised in paragraph 9 of the writ petition, the said authority may dispose of the representation taking into account all releva nt fact and according to law. If the petitioner makes any representation within two weeks from today, the said authority may dispose of the same within two months thereafter. Whateve r may be the outcome of the consideration of the representation, same may be com municated to the petitioner. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, witho ut however, any order as to costs.