WP(C) 609/2005 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a directio n to appoint him on the ground of allotting land for installation of deep tubewe ll for irrigation purpose. According to the petitioner, as per the policy decisi on of the Government, in case of donating land for such purpose, the land owner and his kith and kins are required to be appointed in the Govt. job. Under no ci rcumstances, the Govt. can make appointment bye-passing the recruitment rules. Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under t he said policy, the respondents have appointed the private respondents and thus the case of the petitioner is also required to be considered. I am afraid, such a plea is not sustainable. If the Govt. has committed a wrong, the writ court ca nnot be a party to that by issuing a direction to perpetuate the illegality. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed.