Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

1. Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.P. Choudhury, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam for respondent Nos. 1 to 6. None has appeared for respondent Nos. 7 to 9 though served. This appeal is directed against the final order dated 28.9.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, being WP(C) 1466/2016, filed by the appellant as the writ petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents not to give effect to the select list dated 12.2.2016 for the post of Lot Mandal in the amalgamated establishment of Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri without considering the case of the petitioner as a women candidate.

2. It may be mentioned that petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C) 2140/2015 seeking a direction to the respondent authority to fill up the vacancies in the post of Mandal (Lot Mandal) in the district of Dhubri by issuing advertisement etc. Petitioner had contended that she was interested and was eligible to be appointed as Mandal; despite vacancies being eligible, no steps were taken to initiate the recruitment process. On the basis of submissions made by the learned Govt. Advocate, Assam that there were 6 clear vacancies in the post of Mandal in the amalgamated establishment of Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri, a Single Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.5.2015 disposed of the writ petition by directing the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri to take necessary steps in accordance with law to fill up the 6 available vacancies in the post of Mandal in his establishment and in the event of advertisement being issued for the 6 vacancies, it was open to the petitioner to participate in the selection process subject to fulfillment of the eligibility criteria.

3. Thereafter, Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri issued advertisement dated 25.1.2016 inviting applications from eligible candidates for filling up the 6 vacancies in the Grade-III post of Mandal. As per the break-up of the vacancies, 3 posts were reserved for Scheduled Tribe (Plains) [ST(P)] and 3 for the open category. The age requirement was minimum 18 years and maximum 38 years as on 1.1.2016. As per the terms and conditions No.2 of the advertisement, it was mentioned that reservation would be maintained as per provision.

4. It is stated that the petitioner being eligible had responded to the said advertisement and participated in the selection process as a woman candidate.

5. Following a selection process, Notification dated 12.2.2016 was issued from the office of Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri notifying the select list of 6 successful candidates as under;

"Sri Monsur Ali Sheikh

Sri Hakimuddin Sarkar

Sri Pratap Chowdhury

Sri Biraj Basumatary

Sri Pungkha Brahma

Sri Kamal Kr. Brahma"

6. Not finding her name in the select list, petitioner again approached this Court by filing WP(C) 1466/2016 assailing the legality and correctness of the Notification dated 12.2.2016 on the ground that there was excess reservation for ST(P) candidates and no reservation for woman candidate. By order dated 02.03.2016, notice was issued with the observation that selection and appointment of the six selected Mandals would be subject to the outcome of the writ petition, which was directed to be brought to the notice of the said six Mandals.

7. The writ petition was contested by the State respondents i.e. respondent Nos. 3 to 6 who filed a common affidavit through Sri Debojit Khanikar, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri. Stand taken in the affidavit was that 6 vacancies were advertised following an order of this Court dated 1.12.2014 passed in Contempt Case (C) No. 294/2014 (Md. Hakimuddin Sarkar & another v. Sri Kumud Ch. Kalita). Accordingly, all the 6 vacancies were filled up in terms of the aforesaid order. Selection Committee decided to regularise the services of three candidates from the ST(P) category to clear the backlog. Petitioner belongs to the General category and could not possibly come within the zone of consideration m