WP(C) 4772/2007 BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B.K. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Social Welfare Department. The petitioner claiming himself to be a selected candidate for the post of Statistical Assistant in the District of Karimganj under the Social Welfare D epartment, has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondents to ap point him to the said post. The petitioner has also prayed for setting aside and quashing of the appointment of the respondent No.4, said to have been appointed illegally. However, in the said prayer there is no indication of any appointmen t order and the date of appointment. According to the petitioner, the selection process was initiated for fil ling up 4 (four) vacancies of Statistical Assistant and in the said selection, h e occupied merit position at Sl. No.4 and thus ought to have been appointed. In the select list that was published on 11.2.2006, the Roll No. of the petitioner appears at Sl. No. 6. Ahead of him, there are five Roll Nos. which are 2, 1, 134 , 135 and 80. If we go by the said merit list, the petitioner’s position being a t Sl. No. 6, he cannot be appointed against four vacancies. However, the case of the petitioner is that the candidates with Roll No. 134 and 135 never appeared in the selection and that candidates upto Sl. No. 133 had been invited for the selection. Thus, according to the petitioner, the Roll No. 134 and 135 are the p roduct of manipulation which deprived the petitioner from being appointed. In absence of the candidates with the aforesaid two Roll Nos. i.e. 134 a nd 135 in this proceeding, no adverse orders can be passed against them. That ap art, it is the assertion of the petitioner that the said two candidates had been selected illegally. No material particulars have been disclosed in the writ pet ition. The official respondents have not filed any counter affidavit dealing wit h the aforesaid plea of the petitioner. However, the respondent No.4 has filed a n affidavit stating that he had received call letter bearing No. DSWO(K)92/PT-II I/2004-2005/9 dated 27.1.2005 and accordingly he had appeared in the selection a nd his name having been included in the merit list, he was appointed as per his merit position. In absence of the counter affidavit filed by the official respondents, t he stand of the petitioner is not possible to be appreciated. Situated thus and considering the matter in its entirety, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam in the Social Welfare Department look into the matter and pass appropriate orde r (speaking order) dealing with the aforesaid plea of the petitioner. Let the speaking order be passed as expeditiously as possible but at any rate not later then three months from today. It is made clear that no adverse o rder shall be passed against the candidates bearing Roll No. 134 and 135 without hearing them. The petitioner may obtain a certified copy of this order and produce the same before the said authority for his necessary follow up action. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed off, with out however, any order as to costs.