- (1.) The petitioner in this writ petition dated March 24th, 2008 is seeking a mandamus commanding the respondents not to terminate her service and to regularize her service against existing post. She participated in a selection process initiated by the Child Development Project Officer, Malda and was appointed on temporary basis as an Anganwadi helper. Her service tenure was extended from time to time and the last extension, it is submitted, was valid upto May 31st, 2005. The authority initiated a fresh recruitment process and candidates applying for the posts of Anganwadi helper were invited to take viva on February 12th, 2006. The petitioner did not participate in the selection process, and instead applied for regularization. The questions are whether the authorities can be commanded not to terminate, but to regularize her service.
(2.) By referring me to para.14, counsel for the petitioner submits that in a similar case a single bench of this court held that the authorities could not call upon an already appointed Anganwadi worker to take written test for the same post twice over. It is contended that in view of that decision, the authorities cannot terminate the petitioner s service. I do not see how the question of termination becomes relevant. The petitioner was appointed on a temporary basis for a specific period that was extended from time to time. It is her own case that after May 31st, 2005 the tenure was not extended. This being the position, I do not see how the question of termination can arise. If the authorities permitted her to remain in service even after May 31st, 2005, that can at best amount to implied extension of the tenure of her temporary appointment, but that does not entitle her to say that her service should be regularized. There is no provision that confers such a right on her. She has not been called upon by the authorities to take any test twice over. I therefore do not see how the decision relied on can be of any assistance in her case. For these reasons, I dismiss of the writ petition making it clear that if the petitioner has worked for any period, then remuneration or honorarium payable to her should be paid, if not already paid. There shall be no order for costs.;