WP(C) 640/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. H.I. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. R. Dhar, learned counsel for the private respondents. I have also heard Ms. R. Chokraborty, learned State counsel. The matter relates to selection and appointment of Grade -III and Grade- IV posts. The petitioners dully participated in the selection process, but could not qualify in the same. After such participation when their names were not inc luded in the select list, they have questioned the select list alleging excessiv e reservation. In the first advertisement in question, 21 number of vacancies w ere advertised out of which 14 were kept reserved for reserved category candidat es. Similarly, in the second advertisement out of 16 posts, 10 posts were for re served category candidates. It is on such basis, the petitioners have claimed th at there was excessive reservation. The petitioners have not stated as to what is the total cadre strength a nd also what is the position relating to the backlog vacancies. In paragraph-7 o f the counter affidavit the respondents have given the details of the vacancy po sition and reservation. In absence of a definite plea in reference to the total cadre strength, this court cannot make a roving enquiry so as to set at naught t he selection and appointment that has already been made. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioners. Howev er, in case of any future vacancy, the case of the petitioners may be considered by the respondents in accordance with the recruitment rules. Writ petition is disposed of.