JUDGMENT AND ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. AK Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. The private respondent No. 6 is represented by the learned counsel Mr. I Hussain. 2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal. The facts of the case in brief is that an Advertisement was floated on 7.9.2009 (Annexure-1) by the respondent No.2 for filling up of posts of Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers. Amongst the criteria provided in the Advertisement, it was provided that the applicant must be a local resident of the concerned centre supported by a Certificate issued by the concerned Goan Panchayat. The instant controversy pertains to the filling up of the post of Anganwadi worker under the Jannatpur N.C. Centre which falls under the jurisdiction of Baladmari Char Gaon Panchayat. Both the petitioner and the private respondent No. 6 applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker and the respondents concerned process the matter for selection of the Anganwadi Worker. 3. The writ petitioner being aggrieved with the participation of the private respondent No.6 as well as two other candidates who according to her were not the residents of the Anganwadi Centres concerned, the petitioner therefore filed WP (C) No. 5573 of 2009 which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2009 after coming to a finding that the select list for the Anganwadi centre was yet to be published and therefore the case was premature. In the event of the select list being published and the petitioner not being selected, it was observed that it was open for the petitioner to approach the Court again. 4. Subsequently, the select list for the Anganwadi centre concerned was published and whereby the respondent No.6 came to be selected and appointed as the Anganwadi Worker for the Jannatpur N.C. Anganwadi Centre. Aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 5. Although the State respondents have not filed their affidavit-in-opposition, respondent No.6 has filed her affidavit-in-opposition on 19.8.2010 denying the allegations made by the petitioner. 6. The learned counsel Mr. Aggrieved, the petitioner is again before this Court by filing the instant writ petition. 5. Although the State respondents have not filed their affidavit-in-opposition, respondent No.6 has filed her affidavit-in-opposition on 19.8.2010 denying the allegations made by the petitioner. 6. The learned counsel Mr. AK Hussain for the petitioner by referring to the Certificate issued by the Secretary of Baladmari Char Gaon Panchayat on 18.9.2009 (Annexure-6) submits that the petitioner is a resident of No.2, Baladmari Char, (Zannathpur N/C) and the family BPL Number of the petitioner is No.1305/02. He submits that although a similar certificate was issued to the respondent No.6 by the same Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat on 18.9.2009, the Certificate issued to the respondent No. 6 does not contain the BPL registration number of the respondent No.6. He submits that this is due to the fact that respondent No.6 is not a permanent resident of Baladmari Char Gaon Panchayat. In such circumstances, the learned counsel submits that the respondent authorities appointed respondent No.6 without properly ascertaining the residency of the respondent No.6 and therefore a direction be issued to the respondent No.2 to cause an enquiry about the residency of the respondent No.6 and thereafter take a decision in the matter. 7. Appearing for the respondent No.6, Mr. I Hussain, the learned counsel on the other hand submits that there is no dispute to the fact that respondent No.6 prior to her marriage resided in a different area. But however she got married to one Mr. Ali Hussain on 22.2.2009 and pursuant to which she has moved into the residence and locality of her husband and residing with him since her marriage. He submits that the Advertisement for the post of Anganwadi Worker for the centre concerned was issued on 7.9.2009 which is long after her marriage to her husband who is a local resident of the Anganwadi centre concerned and therefore she applied for the post having come to reside in the Anganwadi centre area more than six months before the Advertisement was floated. In order to substantiate his submissions, the learned counsel Mr. I Hussain refers to the Certificate issued by the Secretary of the Baladmari Char Gaon Panchayat of 18.9.2009 (Annexure-B (1)) and the relevant extract by her marriage to Ali Hussain on 22.2.2009 (Annexure-C). In order to substantiate his submissions, the learned counsel Mr. I Hussain refers to the Certificate issued by the Secretary of the Baladmari Char Gaon Panchayat of 18.9.2009 (Annexure-B (1)) and the relevant extract by her marriage to Ali Hussain on 22.2.2009 (Annexure-C). The learned counsel also submits that the respondent No.6 is a matriculate and therefore duly qualified to be appointed as Anganwadi Worker. 8. Appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 , the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Ms. M Bhattacharjee submits that the authorities concerned upon due scrutinization of the application submitted by the applicants including the petitioner as well as the respondent No.6 had made the selection and therefore respondent No.6 was accordingly recommended and appointed as Anganwadi Worker for the centre concerned. She submits that in such process, the respondents have not committed any mistake and therefore the instant writ petition is without any merit. 9. I have considered the submissions made by the rival parties and I have also perused the materials available on record. The Advertisement dated 7.9.2009 amongst other maintains the eligibility criteria for applying for the post of Anganwadi Worker is that the applicant must be a local resident of the concerned Anganwadi Centre location and the same has to be supported by a Certificate issued by the competent authority including the concerned Gaon Panchayat. The residency of the petitioner is not in dispute and the same therefore requires no examination. However, in case of the respondent No.6, the petitioner has raised a dispute and therefore the claim of the petitioner requires some examination. Respondent No.6 in support of his contention and candidature as well as appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker for the centre concerned has annexed a copy of Certificate issued by the Secretary of Baladmari Char Gaon Panchayat which certifies that the respondent No.6 is a resident of No.2, Baladmari Char, (Zannathpur N/C) area. Furthermore, respondent No.6 has also annexed an extract of the Kabin Nama (Marriage Registration) of her marriage with one Ali Hussain on 22.2.2009. There is no dispute about the resident of Ali Hussain, her husband who admittedly is a permanent resident of No.2, Baladmari Char, (Zannathpur N/C). Furthermore, respondent No.6 has also annexed an extract of the Kabin Nama (Marriage Registration) of her marriage with one Ali Hussain on 22.2.2009. There is no dispute about the resident of Ali Hussain, her husband who admittedly is a permanent resident of No.2, Baladmari Char, (Zannathpur N/C). It is also not in dispute that after marriage, respondent No. 6 has come to live with her husband in the said localit y. Therefore, in the absence of any material to show that respondent No.6 is not residing in No.2, Baladmari Char, (Zannathpur N/C), in my considered opinion, there cannot be any manner of doubt about the residency of the respondent No.6. Therefore, the question of referring the matter to the respondent authorities to find out the residency of respondent No.6 would not be required. 10. Thus, having held that there cannot be any dispute in the given circumstances regarding the residency of the respondent No.6, I find that the writ petition is without any merit and accordingly the same is dismissed. No cost.