WP(C) 1458/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE T VAIPHEI Heard Mr G Uddin, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs VL Singh, the l earned State counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No. 2 & 5. Also hear d Mr J Singh, the learned standing counsel, Social Welfare Department appearing on behalf of the respondents No. 1,3,4,& 6. The case of the petitioner is that she has passed the Higher Sec ondary Examination in 2001 and she is qualified to be appointed for the post of Anganwadi Worker and Helpers under Udali ICDS Project, Hojai, Nagaon, Assam. The State respondents issued the advertisement dated 10.09.2009 inviting applicatio ns from the intending local female candidates for these posts. The minimum quali fying age for the posts of Anganwadi Worker and Helper is 18 years and above and the candidate should belong to a locality of the concerned centers. The petitio ner accordingly applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker against Centre No.17nam ely Singh Gaon Pachim Siddique Ali Colony under Udali ICDS Project. She was howe ver surprised to find that the private respondent, who is a minor and not even e ligible for appointment was allowed to appear in the selection process despite t he objection of the petitioner and other candidates and was eventually appointed to the post of Anganwadi Worker. This Court by the order dated 01.06.2011 while entertaining the writ petition had directed the respondents to show that the pr ivate respondent was not a minor as alleged by the petitioner at the time of app lying for the post. Mr J Singh, the learned standing counsel for the Social Welf are Department has produced the written instruction received by him from the Dis trict Social Welfare Officer, Nagaon. As this letter is relevant, the same is he reby made a part of the record. The letter reveals that the date of birth of the private respondent is 01.05.1993, and as such she was underage at the time of s ubmission of her application or when she appeared in the interview. The aforesai d letter categorically substantiates the case of the petitioner that the private respondent was not eligible for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker whe n she applied for the post in question. Under the circumstances, I do not think it necessary to give time to the State respondents to file their affidavit-in-op position and the writ petition may be disposed of at this stage on the basis of the instruction. In the result, the appointment of the private respondent namely, Sultana Begum Borbhuyan to the post of Anganwadi Worker under Udali ICDS Projec t, Hojai, Nagaon, Assam cannot be sustained in law and is accordingly quashed. C onsequently, the State respondents are directed to consider the petitioner for a ppointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker in accordance with law and shall comp lete the entire exercise within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. A copy of this order be furnished to the learned standing counse l for Social Welfare Department.