ORDER : 1. The recruitment notification dated 09.07.2018, for appointment to the posts of Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook is under challenge in these batch of writ petitions. 2. All the petitioners are fully eligible and qualified for appointment to the posts of Noon Meal Organizers and Assistant Cook. The grievances of the writ petitioners are that, the notification was issued for recruitment to the post of Noon Meal Organizer at the first instance, and all the writ petitioners had submitted their respective applications and participated in the process of selection by attending the interview. After attending the interview, the entire selection was cancelled by the respondents without considering the case of the writ petitioners for issuance of the appointment order. Second time also the petitioners had appeared in the interview and no appointments are made. The present notification is issued once again calling applications from the qualified candidates for recruitment to the post of Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook, through the impugned notification dated 09.07.2018. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner states that, the process of interview had already been concluded and all necessary actions were taken to issue the order of appointment. Under those circumstances, the respondents issued the impugned notification, once again calling application from the original candidates for appointment to the posts of Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook. Thus, the writ petitioners are constrained to file these batch of writ petitions. 4. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that, all the writ petitioners are to be appointed to the posts of Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook, based on the interview already conducted and therefore, the fresh notification issued is liable to be scrapped. 5. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent states that, a paper advertisement dated 31.01.2017, was issued in the vernacular newspaper to fill up the post of Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook. Applications were invited from the eligible candidates as per the norms prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.163, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department dated 18.08.2010. All the writ petitioners had applied for the post of Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook in the respondent Schools and based on the applications and eligibility, writ petitioners were called for the interview on 24.02.2017. Certificate verifications were also done. 6. All the writ petitioners had applied for the post of Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook in the respondent Schools and based on the applications and eligibility, writ petitioners were called for the interview on 24.02.2017. Certificate verifications were also done. 6. However, clear instructions have been issued in G.O.Ms.No.4, Social Welfare and Nutritious Programme Department dated 06.01.2011, regarding the procedures to be followed in the appointment of Noon Meal Organizers and Assistant Cook in Government aided Schools both minority and non-minority institutions. The Government order which is clearly elucidated that District Collector is the appointing Authority for Noon Meal Organizers and Assistant Cook posts. 7. Applications were received till February 2017, were scrutinized on 25.02.2017 and no modalities were evolved to short-list the eligible candidate for selection. In the course of time, modalities were evolved for official respondents to ensure meritorious selection of the candidates for Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook posts. Thus, on 28.03.2018, a call letter was sent to the applicants to appear for interview on 03.04.2018. The steps involved in the selection process and mere attending of the interview would not guarantee appointment. Mean while, the District Administration had to cancel the earlier notification dated 25.01.2017, for not mentioning the community rotation as in much as 55 Noon Meal Organizers posts in Government aided school, non-minority institutions are concerned. 8. The instructions contained in G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 06.01.2011, regarding the procedures to be followed in the appointment of Noon Meal Organizers and Assistant Cook in Government aided Schools which has been clearly pointed out that, community rotations has to be followed for Noon Meal Organizer and Assistant Cook posts in Government aided schools, non-minority institutions. In view of the fact that, such community rotations are not mentioned in the earlier notification. The respondents had taken a decision to cancel the earlier notification and to issue a fresh notification duly mentioning the community rotation and other eligible criteria in the present impugned notification dated 09.07.2018. 9. Thus, there is no irregularity in respect of the impugned notification and the writ petitioners are at liberty to submit their applications in response to the impugned notification, if they are fully eligible and qualified as per the terms and conditions stipulated. 10. Mere participation in the process of selection would not confer any right on the candidates to seek appointment. 10. Mere participation in the process of selection would not confer any right on the candidates to seek appointment. Undoubtedly, the writ petitioners had participated in the process of interview. However, the respondents/Competent Authorities had taken a decision to cancel the notification on account of the fact that, the community rotation had not been mentioned in the earlier notification. The respondents are bound to follow the community rotation as per the Government policy. In the event of appointing candidates without following the community rotation, then such appointments will be in valid. 11. Under these circumstances, the non mentioning of the community rotation in the earlier notification was identified and suitable actions were taken by cancelling the earlier notification. In this regard, the rights of the writ petitioners are not infringed. The writ petitioners are eligible to participate in the present selection also, pursuant to the notification now issued, which is impugned in the present writ petition. This apart, the only grievance of the writ petitioners are that, they have participated in the interview and therefore, they should be appointed in the post. Mere participation in the interview will not be a ground for claiming appointment. The Authorities Competent found the irregularity occurred in the earlier notification and accordingly, cancelled the notification and issued the fresh notification, inviting applications from all the eligible candidates. 12. This being the factum, the writ petitioners cannot seek appointment based on the fact that, they attended the interview. The entire process of selection was cancelled and a fresh notification was issued fulfilling the conditions stipulated in the Government orders for appointment to the post of Noon Meal Organizer/Assistant Cook. In this view of the matter, the writ petitioners has not establish any legal right so as to grant the relief as such sought for in the present writ petitions. Accordingly, the writ petitions stands dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.