Mir Dara Sheko, J. - (1.) Heard Mr Bhattacharya being assisted by Mr Thakur and Ms Ghosh representing the petitioners and also Mr Pal being assisted by Mr Sarkar appearing for the State.
(2.) Let affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the respondent no.8 and reply thereto be taken on record.
(3.) The instant writ petition virtually is an off-track application for alleged noncompliance of the order passed by the Division Bench of this court. Upon hearing both sides and from the materials on record it reveals that so far as the selection of Anganwadi Helper (Cook) pursuant to the Government policy, one panel was prepared on April 1, 2008. Said panel was assailed before this court more than once and ultimately it could not stand. In second round litigation in WP No.4689(W) of 2010 this court on July 7, 2015 again allowed the writ by recording, inter alia, the following observations: "In the facts and circumstances the Memo dated 15th October, 2009 requiring the Child Development Project Officer, Murshidabad ICDS Project to follow up the order of the District Magistrate, Murshidabad at once by issuing appointment for Anganwadi Helpers issued pursuant to the said order dated 10th June, 2009, requires compliance. The expiry of the life of the panel cannot stand in the way of such compliance since the writ petition was filed within the subsistence of the said panel and is the position in law as declared in Ram Swarup Saroj as well as Nirupama (Roy) Barman . For the aforesaid reasons the writ petition succeeds. There will be an order in terms of prayer 'A' within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order to be made by the petitioners upon the respondent nos. 4 and 7. The State is to undertake necessary administrative exercise in the matter of giving appointments by, inter alia, publication of the said panel. Mr. Bhattacharya's submission is recorded that the order made is confined to the petitioners in this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of.";