WP(C) 1027/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr S Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr MK Mishra, learn ed Standing Counsel, Education Department and Mr D Das, learned Standing counse l, Bodoland Territorial Council( for short, hereafter referred to as ’BTC’). The petitioners have pleaded that in a selection process initiated in t he year 2001 by the concerned authorities of the then Bodoland Autonomous Counc il, they participated and were duly selected as is evident from the select li st dated 30.3.2001 that was published. Their grievance is that though thereaft er there were host of official correspondences more particularly on the aspect of approval of the financial implications following their recruitment in servic e , nothing fruitful has resulted. Being aggrieved, meanwhile, the petitioners have submitted a represent ation on 24.9.2009 before the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, department of Education which also remains unheeded as on date. Mr Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that for the pre sent it would meet their grievance if this petition is closed with a direction to the aforementioned authority to dispose of their representation on merits a t an early date. Mr Mishra while pointing out that the claimed selection is of the year 2 001 and that even if the process has not yet been completed, no direction shoul d be issued to this effect, submits that he has no objection to the disposal of the petitioners’ representation on merit. Mr Das , learned Standing counsel, B TC also agrees to the mode of disposal as proposed. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the pleaded facts, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Commi ssioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Department of Education, Dispur to consider and dispose of the petitioners’ representation on merits. As the petitioners wait in expectation , the process a s ordered should be completed within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this court ha s not offered any comment on the merit of the petitioners’ claim and it would b e within the discretion and domain of the aforementioned authority to decide in this regard. The petitioners would be at liberty to submit a copy of the writ p etition with its annexures along with the certified copy of this order in suppor t of their claim if so advised. No costs.