WP(C) 5429/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA.. The petitioner claims that the Respondent No.6 being not a resident of t he Anganwadi Centre in question, she could not have been appointed as Anganwadi Worker. There is claim and counter-claim regarding the residential certificate i ssued by the Gaonburah in favour of the parties. This Court exercising writ juri sdiction cannot decide the disputed question of fact. In view of the above and upon hearing Dr. G. Lal, learned counsel for th e petitioner as well as Mr. B. K. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Social Welfar e Department and so also, Mr. F.U. Borbhuya, learned counsel appearing for the R espondent No.6, this writ petition stands disposed of directing the authorities in the Social Welfare Department to decide the issue based on the record availab le.