Judgment 1. The petitioner was appointed by the fourth respondent, without following the mandatory provisions regarding public appointment. When the said violation was brought to the knowledge of fourth respondent, the Panchayat adopted a resolution cancelling the appointment of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner was not appointed through a transparent method. The fourth respondent failed to intimate the Employment Exchange to sponsor candidates. Similarly, there was no publication in local newspapers. The fourth respondent appears to be under the impression that she could appoint any body without reference to the Employment Exchange or by giving publication in local newspapers. The appointment of the petitioner was a secret affair made by the fourth respondent. 3. In view of the withdrawal of appointment, nothing survives for adjudication in the writ petition. 4. The writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.(md).No.1 of 2014 is also dismissed.