JUDGMENT 1. The grievance as made out by the writ petitioner is that pursuant to an advertisement dated 1st September, 2014 issued by the Member Secretary of the District Selection Committee, North Garo Hills District, Resubelpara, wherein applications have been invited for filling up one post of Hindi Teacher, the petitioner being eligible had tendered his candidature for the same. It is his case that though the written examinations had been conducted as far back as on 29-01-2016, the results till date have not been declared which has compelled the writ petitioner to approach this Court. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is noted from the submissions and the materials on record that the District Selection Committee on the basis of information provided by the Sub-Divisional School Education Officer vide letter No. SDSEO/DSC-94/20133864 dated 21-11-2013 had advertised for various vacant posts for the District including the post of Hindi teacher, the post against which the petitioner had applied for. Thereafter, by another communication received from the District School Education Officer, North Garo Hills vide letter No. DSEO-R/APPT-10/2016/647 dated 23-08-2016, the District Selection Committee was informed that the appointment to the post of Assistant Teachers in the Government U.P. Schools does not fall under the purview of the District Selection Committee but the same were to be made by the Government as per the Meghalaya School Service Rules, 2012. On receipt of such instructions, the process of selection to the post of Hindi Teacher in the Government U.P. School was then discontinued, which was the reason for non-declaration of the results of the written examination for the said post. 3. In the context of the facts as placed above, it would be expedient to examine the limitation and functions of the District Selection Committee as to whether it was the competent authority to have issued the advertisement for recruitment of Teachers in Government U.P. Schools. The composition and functions of the District Selection Committee for the Districts in the State of Meghalaya and the procedure for direct recruitment to various categories of posts which come under the purview of the Committee has been detailed in Office Memorandum No. PER(AR) 49/2012/5 dated 17-11-2014. Clause 3.1 provides the categories of posts for which the District Selection Committee can undertake to conduct selection. The said clause 3.1 is quoted herein below: '3.1. Clause 3.1 provides the categories of posts for which the District Selection Committee can undertake to conduct selection. The said clause 3.1 is quoted herein below: '3.1. Functions - The District Selection Committee shall undertake to conduct written examinations, tests and/or interviews for the purpose of recommending candidates suitable for appointments by direct recruitment to different categories of posts, which are borne in the offices/establishments of the District or Sub-divisional/Subordinate Offices, and which do not come under the purview of the Meghalaya Public Service Commission or Departmental Selection Committee.' 4. A bare perusal of the said clause 3.1 clearly shows that the District Selection Committee is only competent to conduct selection process for the posts which are borne in the offices/establishments of the Districts or Sub-divisional/Subordinate offices. Recruitment to the post of Assistant Teacher in a Government U.P. School therefore will not fall within the ambit of the powers of the District Selection Committee to advertise or to make selection and as adverted by the communication dated 23-08-2016, is to be made as per the Meghalaya School Service Rules, 2012. 5. What has occasioned in the present case appears to be a total lack of application of mind on the part of the Member Secretary, District Selection Committee while advertising the post; and also, from the part of the District School Education Officer in informing the District Selection Committee about the said vacancy. The petitioner therefore is justified in being aggrieved, inasmuch as, he had a legitimate expectation of securing employment if he was successful in the selection process which however for the reasons observed above, was abandoned. 6. Apart from the anxiety and inconvenience that the petitioner has been put through, no enforceable legal right has however accrued to him to warrant the grant of any of the reliefs prayed for, as the action of the respondents in advertising and conducting the written test for the said post was absolutely without any authority and the same had been caused by pure error. 7. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is closed and disposed of. However, the petitioner is awarded a cost of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One thousand) only to be paid by the office of the respondent No.1 within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.