WP(C) 4912/2010 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE T VAIPHEI Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. VL Singh, learned standing counsel. The petitioner is aggrieved by the appointment of the private respondents to the post of Gram Savak who had secured less marks than him in the selection process . It is the case of the petitioner that he applied for the post of Gram Savak un der the Panchayat and Rural Development Department of Assam and has the requisit e qualifications for that post. He appeared in the written test in response to the call letter dated 21.11.05 issued by the respondent No.2. In response to the call letter dated 31.7.07 issued by the respondent No.3, he also appeared in th e viva voce test. The specific allegation of the petitioner is that in the selec tion process, he obtained 79 marks in the written test and 14 marks in the viva voce test thereby making a total mark of 93 but the private respondents i.e. re spondents 4 and 5 who obtained 86.5 and 89 marks respectively which are admitted ly less than the marks secured by him, were appointed for the post. Contending t hat the appointments of the private respondents are illegal, the petitioner seek s the intervention of this Court for quashing their appointments and for directi ng the respondent authorities to appoint him for the post of Gram Savak. The wri t petition is opposed by the State respondents. The Project Director, District R ural Development Agency, Hailakandi, who is arrayed as respondent No. 3, has fil ed his affidavit-in-opposition. It is admitted by the answering respondent that the petitioner indeed obtained 79 marks in the written examination but claims ig norance about the result of the viva voce test as the test was conducted by the Office of the respondent No. 2. No affidavit-in-opposition is filed by the respo ndent No.2 even though serious allegation has been made about the conduct of the selection process made by his office. The letter dated 4.4.09 issued by the Dep uty Director, Directorate of Panchayat & Rural Development, Assam to the Joint Director & State Public Information Officer, Directorate of Panchayat & Rural De velopment has furnished the information that the petitioner obtained 79 marks in the written test while marks obtained in the viva voce test was 14. In my opini on, the case of the petitioner is, prima facie, substituted by this letter which is annexed at page 13 of the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petiti oner however, submits that the ends of justice will be met if the Director of Pa nchayat & Rural Development Department, Assam (now designated as Commissioner, P anchayat & Rural Development Department, Assam) is directed to consider the case of the petitioner as projected in the writ petition and then take a decision in accordance with law by a speaking order. As desired b y the learned counsel, th is writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :- (1) The petitioner will submit a copy of the writ petition with annexures to the Director, Panchayat & Rural Development Department (now designated as Commi ssioner, Panchayat & Rural Dev elopement Department, Assam) within 10 days from today; (2) The Director, Panchayat & Rural Development Department (Now designated a s Commissioner, Panchayat & Rural Development Department of Assam) will then exa mine the case of the petitioner on the basis of the pleadings contained in the writ petition and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the writ petition along with a c opy of this order; (3) While taking a decision , the respondent No.2 will take into account the observation made by me in the foregoing; (4) No cost.