WP(C) 7710/2004 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. H. Thakuria, learned counsel for the petitioner as wel l as Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel for the respondents. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner have prayed for a direction to the respondents to complete the selection process stated to have b een initiated by the respondents for appointment of Anganwadi Workers. According to the petitioners, the respondents had issued advertisement in the year 2002 i nviting applications from the eligible candidates for appointment as Anganwadi W orker/Helper under Rupashi ICDS project. In response to the advertisement, the p etitioners along with others offered their candidature. Although statement have been made that written and oral test were held, but no particulars have been dis closed relating to such written and oral test. Upon a reference to Annexure-1 letter dated 10.9.2004, it is the case of the petitioners that the Selection Committee meeting was held on 17.9.2 004. The results of the selection having not been declared, the petitioners have filed this writ petition for the aforesaid direction. It is the case of the pet itioners that on enquiry in the office of the respondents, they have come to kno w that the respondents have decided not to complete the selection process in vie w of the direction of this Court passed in WP(C) No. 5279/2003. The writ petitio n was disposed of by order dated 27.2.2004. According to the petitioners, the re spondents have contemplated to regularize the services of the petitioners involv ed in the said writ petition and to cancel the selection conducted in 2004. In the aforesaid writ petition, the prayer of the petitioners wa s to regularize their services as Anganbadi workers. The writ petition was dispo sed of by the aforesaid order dated 27.2.2004 directing the respondents that in the event of consideration of the case of the petitioners for regularization, th ey should take into account the past services rendered by the petitioners toward s seniority and other service benefits. It was also provided that consideration would be on the basis of the rules and guidelines holding the filed. On a bare perusal of the aforesaid order dated 27.2.2004 passed in WP(C) No. 5279/2003, there is no manner of doubt the direction of this Court was not to regularize the services of the petitioners involved, dehorse the recr uitment rules, in fact, direction was issued to follow the rules and guidelines holding the filed. Only provision made was to take into account the past service s rendered by the petitioners involved in the writ petition. The aforesaid direc tion of this Court cannot stand on the way to complete the selection process, if initiated by the respondents as has been contended by the petitioners. In absence of any material particular, it is not discernible as to whether in fact there was any advertisement in the year 2002 and the petition ers have appeared in the selection purportedly conducted by the respondents. In view of the above, writ petitions are disposed of providing t hat the aforesaid order dated 27.2.2004 passed in WP(C) No. 5279/2003 shall not stand on way towards finalization of the selection process, if had been initiate d by the respondents in 2002 as has been contended by the petitioners and if sam e have not been abandoned in the meantime and/or otherwise has attained its fina lity. Writ petitions are disposed of.