WP(C) 6613/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE U B SAHA Instant Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners, 49 in Nos. for a direction to the Respondent, Commissioner of Transport, Government of Assam to consider the representation dated 19.11.2010, wherein they made a prayer for appointing them relaxing their age bar being they served the Respondent State from the year 200 1 to 2008 on adhoc basis. Heard Mr. H Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners as wel l Mr. U Rajbongshi, learned Standing Counsel for the Department of Transport, Go vernment of Assam who appears at this motion stage and also agreed to the propos al of the petitioners for disposal of the writ petition at this motion stage. Co nsidering the nature of the prayer and the fact that the petitioners were also s erved the State of Assam , before the termination of their adhoc service, the ma tter is taken up for disposal at the motion stage. The brief facts needed to be discussed are as follows:- The petitioners were appointed on adhoc basis in the year 20 01 as Assistant Enforcement Inspector and Enforcement Checkers in various distr icts of Assam under the Transport Department. The Govt. of Assam tried to fill up 32 posts of Assistant Enforcement Inspector and 32 Enforcement Checkers v ide Employment Notice dated 19.07.2001 and 21.12.2003. These two notices were in terfered by this Court and consequent thereto the matter went to the Supreme Cou rt and ultimately the Supreme Court in SLP No.' 1473-1475 of 2008 set aside the Judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 20.01.2006 and 20.12.2 007 in Writ Appeal No. 249/ 2006, Writ Appeal No. 278 / 2006 and Writ Appeal 57 /2007 respectively. After disposal of the SLP No.' 1473-1475 of 2008 the petitio ners are no where. As the State Government is presently going to create some pos t of Assistant Enforcement Inspector as well as Enforcement Checkers , the pet itioners submitted a representation on 19.11.2010 ( Annexure-B to the Writ pet ition) before the Respondent No.2 herein. But the said representation has not ye t been disposed of by the Commissioner of Transport, Respondent No. 2, hence the writ petition. While Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners urging fo r the relief sought for contended that admittedly the petitioners have no right to be appointed on particular post and they also cannot asked for creation of p osts for taking them back in the services after the decision of the Apex Court. But at the same time as the State from their own going to create the posts of th e Assistant Enforcement Inspector and Enforcement Checkers and also considering to fill up those posts recently, their representation is to be considered with human touch. Mr. Rajbonshi, learned Standing Counsel submits that if the petitioners are taken back to the post they hold earlier then the unemployed y ouths who are waiting for job would be deprived and their future would also be s ealed and that would also hit the provision of Article 14 of the Constitution o f India. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and af ter going through the records, this Court is of the considered opinion that it i s a settled position of law that that a court cannot take the place of employer and also has no power to direct the employer to appoint a person without followi ng the prescribed procedure of public employment. At the same time, the Court sh ould not forget that the persons who served for long time they have legitimate e xpectation that their representation would be considered by the authority relaxi ng their age taking note of their earlier service subject to there is provisions for relaxation in the recruitment Rules. In the instant case, as admittedly the representation ( Annexure-B) of the petitioners are pending before the Commiss ioner of Transport. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a directi on to the Respondent No. 2, Commissioner of Transport, Govt. of Assam to dispose the representation (Annexure-B) of the petitioners within a period of 1(one) mo nth from the date of receipt of this order by a speaking order. The petitioners are also directed to furnish a copy of t his order along with a copy of the writ petition to the Respondent No. 2 within a period of 7 (seven) days from today.