Back
KRISHNA RAO
Golenur Khatun (BIBI) – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Krishna Rao, J. - The writ petitioner has filed the instant writ application praying for modification of the order passed by the District Magistrate, Malda dt. 16.01.2014 wherein the District Magistrate, Malda has passed the following order:-
'Perused the report of the District Controller of Food and Supplies, Malda, DCFS Malda in his memo no. 2681/DCF(M)/13 dtd. 26/12/13 has stated that date of transfer of ration card should be treated as the effective date of permanent residence.
Considering all the above fats the following points can be stated- 1. As per report of SDO (S) vide memo no 3291/SDO(S) dtd. 16/12/2013 the name of respondent no 6 could not be found in part no 74 of Manichak AC in the draft Electoral Roll-2007 published on 14.11.2007 2. As per report of DCFS, Malda date of transfer of ration card should be treated as effective date of permanent residence. Since the ration card of private respondent no 6 was not tagged before 23/12/13 i.e, the date of interview, hence private respondent no 6 cannot be considered as a permanent resident of village Eiahitaia, Manikchak under Gopalpur health sub-centre during the period in question.
I, Shri Sharad K. Dwivedi dispose of
The importance of EPIC or Ration Card as proof of residence for appointment as an ASHA worker.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of an application based on non-residential status must be supported by legally tenable reasons.
De-recognition of an Accredited Social Health Activist requires adherence to procedural guidelines, reflecting the authority of the Gram Sabha in appointment matters.
The authority to de-recognize an Accredited Social Health Activist lies solely with selecting authorities, and proper procedures must be followed, failing which such orders are deemed invalid.
Engagement orders in public service can be revised when based on a mistake, particularly if misrepresentation affects eligibility.
The court upheld the importance of residence requirements and merit-based selection in the engagement of Anganwari Workers.
The court emphasized the right to livelihood under Article 21, affirming that administrative decisions must consider valid evidence and cannot disregard established facts that support eligibility.
Writ of certiorari does not permit re-evaluation of evidence but ensures adherence to natural justice; findings of fact can only be overturned if shown to lack basis.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
