WP(C) 1586/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA. Heard Mr. JUNM Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms R. Chakr aborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam. Both the writ petitions have been filed by the same petitioner. While in WP(C) N o.128/2011, the prayer of the petitioner is not to appoint the Respondent No.9 a s Anganwadi Worker for the Anganwadi Centre at Devostan Choudhury Colony A.W.C. No.110 under Jugijan ICDS Project, Hojai, Nagaon, the prayer made in the second writ petition being WP(C) No.1586/2011 is to issue a direction to the respondent s to appoint the petitioner against the said post of Anganwadi Worker. In the first writ petition, the petitioner has alleged that the Respondent No.9 being an outsider cannot be appointed as Anganwadi Worker in the aforesaid Angan wadi Centre. During the pendency of the writ petition, when the respondents dec ided to fill up the honorary post of Anganwadi Worker through a fresh advertisem ent, the petitioner filed the second writ petition claiming appointment against the said honorary assignment. The ground on which the fresh advertisement was issued, is that there is no qualified H.S.L .C. passed candidate, who could be selected in the earlier selection. Upon a reference to the guidelines for appointment of Anganwadi Worker, which pr ovides for qualification of H.S.L.C. passed, it is the plea of the petitioner th at since the said guidelines also provide for consideration of Class-IX passed c andidates in absence of H.S.L.C. passed candidates, the authorities ought to hav e considered the case of the petitioner, who is a Class-IX passed candidate. It is entirely upon the authorities to decide as to whether they should insist upon the H.S.L.C. passed candidate for the assignment or relax the said qualific ation as per the aforesaid guidelines. This Court exercising its writ jurisdicti on cannot issue any direction to appoint the petitioner, who is a Class-IX passe d candidate. The authority having decided to select the candidates with H.S.L.C. passed qualification, the said decision cannot be said to be arbitrary and ille gal. Consequently, no direction can be issued to the respondents for appointment of the petitioner. In view of the above, both the writ petitions are dismissed. The respondents wil l now proceed with the selection for appointment of Anganwadi Worker for the afo resaid center.