WP(C) 1307/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner, also Mr. S.K. Singha, learned counsel for the Respondent No.4. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the appointment of the Responden t No.4 as the Anganwadi Worker in No.441 Pub Janpar Anganwadi Centre under Mayon g ICDS project in the district of Morigaon on the ground that she is not a perma nent resident of Vill. Dekagaon within the territorial limits of the aforenamed Centre and thus in terms of the norms prescribed is not eligible for the appoint ment under challenge. The Respondent No.4, in her affidavit has refuted the above claiming herself to be a permanent resident of the above village. She has asserted that the challen ge to her appointment is untenable, as the concerned respondent authorities have not outlined the exact boundary of the concerned Anganwadi Centre to disqualify her. Though, the official respondents have not filed their affidavit, in respo nse to the order of this Court, written instructions have been furnished by them to their learned Standing Counsel to the effect that the village in which the R espondent No.4 resides does not fall within the jurisdiction of No.441 Pub Janpa r Anganwadi Centre under Mayong ICDS project in the district of Morigaon. Whereas, Mr. Mahmud insists that in view of the above written instruction as has been recorded in the order dated 12.11.2010 of this Court, the Respondent No.4 is clearly ineligible to be appointed as the Anganwadi Worker of the aforementio ned Centre, Mr. Singha asserts that an affidavit endorsing the same (written ins truction) ought to be filed by the official respondents. When the matter is taken up today, none is present to represent the official res pondents. No affidavit, as on date, has been filed. In the above view of the m atter, this Court does not consider it necessary to wait for the respondents to file affidavit, more particularly in view of the aforementioned written instruct ion to the above effect. In this factual premise, this Court is constrained to hold against the eligibility of the Respondent No.4 to be appointed as Anganwadi Worker of the No.441 Pub Janpar Anganwadi Centre, Mayong ICDS project. There is no wrangle in the Bar that residence of a candidate within the territorial limi ts of an Anganwadi Centre is an essential condition of eligibility. This petition is thus allowed. The appointment of Respondent No.4 is hereby int erfered with. No costs.