WP(C) 6819/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr B Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms R Chakrabort y, learned State counsel. The petitioner is back to this Court with the payer for an appropriate w rit and/or direction to the respondents to regularise her service as a Grade-III employee in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon. According to her, sh e had been working as a Typist on contingency manual basis in the aforementioned establishment since 2.8.94. As all her endeaours to get her service regularised had failed she approached this Court with WP(C) 3475/99 which was dismissed. It was thereafter that she participated in a selection process in the year 2008 an d also appeared in the interview in connection therewith. As nothing was forthco ming from that exercise, she on 27.9.2010 submitted a representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon seeking regular appointment to any Grade-III post or regularisation of her services thereat. As the representation as well has remai ned unattended as on date, she is before this Court. Whereas Mr Islam in reiteration of the above has submitted that having r egard to the length of uninterrupted service rendered by the petitioner she is e ntitled to have the same regularized, Ms Chakraborty has urged to the contrary c ontending that she has no vested right to claim the same. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the pleaded facts and the documents on record, this Court is inclined to sust ain the objection raised on behalf of the respondents. As a matter of fact, by o rder dated 6.6.2001 of this Court rendered in WP(C) 3475/99 all these aspects we re considered by a coordinate Bench hereof leaving her at liberty to participate in any process of selection for regular appointment to the post commensurate to her academic qualification and experience. The petitioner has averred in the wr it petition that in the year 2008 she had appeared in an interview in relation t o a selection for regular appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk. She h as complained that on this occasion her candidature was not considered for regul arisation. In the above background, this Court considers it expedient to direct the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 27.9.2010 on merits. It is made clear that this Court has not offered any comme nt in departure from the observations recorded in the order dated 6.6.2001 of th is Court rendered in WP(C) No. 3475/99 and the aforementioned District authority would do the needful strictly in accordance with the relevant Rules and adminis trative guidelines in this regard. No costs.