ORDER : SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J 1. Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Shah for the petitioner and Ms. Sunita, J.C. to S.C.(L & C) for the respondents. The petition is preferred to issue the selection letter in favour of the petitioner to the post of Sevika for Anganbari Centre Ghat Pakaria, P.S. Godda(T) District Godda and to quash the provisional selection letter to the post of Sevika for Anganbari Centre Ghat Pakaria, P.S. Godda (T), District Godda issued in favour of Respondent No. 5. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the concerned authorities decided to hold Village General Meeting on 22.08.2009 for selection to the post of Sevika and Sahayika for the Anganbari Centre, Ghat Pakaria, Panchayat Rupiyama, P.S. Godda(T), District Godda. Accordingly, the petitioner along with Respondent No.5 applied to the post of Sevika. He further contends that as per the schedule the Village General Meeting was held and the petitioner was selected in the post of Sevika for Anganbari Centre, Ghat Pakaria, Panchayat-Rupiyama, P.S. Godda(T), District Godda. The Child Development Project Officer, Godda (T)-(Rural) issued Provisional Selection Letter to the petitioner on 22.8.2009. He con-tends that respondent no. 5 was not selected. He further submits that all of a sudden, without notice to the petitioner, authorities decided to hold a fresh village General Meeting on 23.09.2009 for Angan Bari Centre, Ghat Pakaria for appointment on the post of Anganbari Sevika. The petitioner has not been the fact as to why her selection has been cancelled. On 23.09.2009, separate meeting was held and Respondent No.5 and petitioner participated in the said Village General Meeting, but in the said meeting concerned authority could not take any decision and later on, in another Village General Meeting dated 05.10.2009, Respondent No. 5 has been selected and issued appointment letter. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State has drawn the attention of this Court to paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit dated 03.2.2010 filed by the respondent State, wherein it has been stated that at Anganbari Centre, Ghat Pakadia, Panchayat, Rupiyama, P.S. Godda(T), Distt. Godda, Aam Sabha was convened on 22.8.2009 but corum of the Aam Sabha was not complete as except for the ANM, no other authority was present in the said Aam Sabha and therefore, the District Administration cancelled the Aam Sabha and 23.9.2009 was fixed for the next Aam Sabha. 4. Godda, Aam Sabha was convened on 22.8.2009 but corum of the Aam Sabha was not complete as except for the ANM, no other authority was present in the said Aam Sabha and therefore, the District Administration cancelled the Aam Sabha and 23.9.2009 was fixed for the next Aam Sabha. 4. She further submits that no decision has been taken in the said meeting dated 23.9.2009 and the District Authorities directed the Child Development Project Officer, Godda to hold another Aam Sabha and take decision as per the result of the Aam Sabha. So, again on 05.10.2009, Aam Sabha was organised by the Child Development Project Officer, Godda. In the Aam Sabha, Respondent No.5 was finally selected. 5. Learned counsel for the State argues that the petitioner was never selected earlier as the selection at that stage was only provisional in nature. It was cancelled as the Aam Sabha was not having the corum and thereafter, subsequent Aam Sabha was convened and Respondent No. 5 has been selected. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this court finds that this matter does not require any interference by this court as there is no illegality in the appointment of Respondent No.5 and although there is an alternative remedy of appeal, the petitioner has not availed the same. 7. The writ petition is dismissed.