Invoking power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the instant writ petition has been filed praying for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioners for appointment to the vacant posts of Sahayak on the basis of the interview/selection held on 12.11.2009. 2. Heard Mr. NK Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D Nath, learned Standing Counsel, ASEB appearing for the respondents. 3. The petitioners? case in brief is that the petitioners are permanent resident of village Nalkata in the district of Lakhimpur, Assam and they belonged to Ahom community which is recognized 3 as OBC in the State of Assam. The petitioners have been engaged as contract labourer under the contractor for carrying out maintenance work of 220/132/33 KV transmission line under Lakhimpur T&T Division from time to time with effect from the year 2000 and the petitioners have experience in carrying out maintenance work in high voltage transmission lines in Lakhimpur district. While they were serving as such they came to know that some posts of Grade IV Sahayak are lying vacant in the Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Ltd. („AEGCL? for short) Tezpur T&T Circle and for the purpose of filling up the said vacant posts of Sahayak, the Deputy General Manager, Tezpur T&T has sought for the names of eligible candidates working under different substations and sub-Divisions of AEGCL including AEGCL Nalkata, North Lakhimpur. The petitioners accordingly applied for the same and their names were recommended by the authority. Accordingly, the petitioners appeared before the interview board on 12.11.2009 alongwith the necessary testimonials required for the interview. However, the select list was not prepared for one year from the date of selection. When the matter rested as thus, the petitioners came to know that the respondent authorities pursuant to the interview conducted on 12.11.2009 contemplated to give appointment to some candidates of their choice, hence, the petitioners approached this Court by way of filing the writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. 4. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 in the instant writ petition. It has been stated on oath at para 6 that 16 numbers of posts of Sahayak were to be filled up for operation and maintenance of various Sub- Stations mentioned at para 6. 4. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 in the instant writ petition. It has been stated on oath at para 6 that 16 numbers of posts of Sahayak were to be filled up for operation and maintenance of various Sub- Stations mentioned at para 6. Accordingly, the authorities have decided to fill up the aforesaid 16 posts by giving opportunities to the person serving on contractual basis or daily basis workers as well as the candidates sponsored by Employment Exchange at the ratio of 25% and 75% respectively, i.e. 4 posts by departmental candidates and 12 posts by candidates who were sponsored by Employment Exchange. The persons who are serving or in engagement under the respondents on temporary or daily wage basis through the contractors were considered to be departmentally sponsored candidates and altogether 27 numbers of candidates were sponsored by the Senior Manager of the Circle including the petitioners who were called to appear before the interview board. The interview board, on completion of selection process, forwarded the names of the selected departmentally sponsored candidates for approval of the Managing Director, AEGCL. In the meantime, the AEGCL enhanced the quota of departmentally sponsored candidates and increased the ratio to 40:60, i.e. 6 posts for departmental candidates and 10 posts for Employment Exchange sponsored candidates. Thereafter, the Review Committee approved a list of 12 departmental candidates in its meeting held on 25.3.2010 from the list so prepared, the first 6 candidates, 3 numbers each for 132 KV Biswanath Chariali Sub5 Station and 132 KV Majuli Sub-Station were thus appointed. In the said select list petitioners? name did not find place. 5. Mr. Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners, in the meantime, have gathered experience of more than 11/12 years. They are working with the hope of regularisation of their services in the AEGCL till date and after few years the petitioners will be age barred for appointment in any post. Mr Barua, therefore, prays for a direction to the AEGCL authority to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization of their services in any post of Sahayak in any Sub- Stations under Lakhimpur district. 6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Also perused the materials available on record. Mr Barua, therefore, prays for a direction to the AEGCL authority to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization of their services in any post of Sahayak in any Sub- Stations under Lakhimpur district. 6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Also perused the materials available on record. Admittedly, the petitioners are serving under the AEGCL authority since 2000 i.e. for more than eleven years and thereby they have gathered experience while serving as such. However, in view of the decision rendered by the Hon?ble Apex Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and others –vs- Umadevi and others reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 , no direction can be issued to the authority to regularize the service of the petitioners as the post of “Sahayak” is an open selection post. It is, however, made clear that as and when the post will be advertised the petitioner would be allowed to participate in the selection process by relaxing their age, if 6 necessary, as per Rules in vogue. The authority shall also consider the experience gathered by the petitioners so far. 7. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. ______________