WP(C) 558/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI Heard Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. B. J. Ghosh, le arned Govt. Advocate, Assam, appearing for the respondents. Pursuant to the advertisement, dated 21.8.2004, calling for applications to be m ade for selection and appointment, as constables, in various Assam Police Battal ions, the petitioners participated in the selection process. They claim that tho ugh they were selected, they have not been appointed. As against the claim so made by the petitioners, the respondents, while resistin g the writ petition, have filed their counter-affidavit. The case of the respond ents, as set out in paragraph 4 of their counter-affidavit, read as under : 4. That as regards to the statements made in paragraph 2 of the writ petiti on the deponent begs to state that the petitioners No.1 to 4 and 7 to 10 appeare d in the interview for selection of candidate for appointment as constable in As sam Police conducted for Nalbari District held at 14th A.P.Bn. Hqr. Daulasal in the month of December, 2004 and January 2005. All the petitioners could not suc ceed in the Viva Voce and petitioner Sri Hemen Chandra Roy Sl. No.3 and Sri Hite sh Das Sl. No.4 also failed in 100 Mtrs. Sprint. Hence all the petitioners were not selected for appointment by the District Level Selection Committee. There i s no any record regarding appearing of petitioner No.5 Sri Suren Deka and No.6 S ri Sanjay Das before the selection committee for Nalbari District. The above averments, made in the counter-affidavit by the State respondents, hav e remained undisputed and unchallenged by the petitioners. The petitioners have not annexed to the writ petition or placed on record any material showing that t hey were selected as claimed by them. This apart, they have not even disclosed, in their writ petition, as to how they have come to know that they stood selecte d in the said selection process. Situated thus, it become clear that the petitioners are not able to make out any case whatsoever warranting invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, u nder Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the purpose of directing the State respondents to appoint the petitioners. In the result and for the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is not admitted and the same shall accordingly stand dismissed. No order as to cost.