Ujjal Bhuyan, J. -- By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 6.8.2012 passed by Director of Social Welfare, Assam directing respondent No.4 to make proper survey of the Anganwadi centre in question, survey report prepared by respondent No.4 as well as the order dated 6.9.2012 passed by the Director, Social Welfare Department declaring that residence of the petitioner and respondent No.7 are within the jurisdictional area of the Anganwadi Centre in question, thus rejecting the claim of the petitioner for setting aside the selection and appointment of respondent No.7 as Anganwadi Worker of the Anganwadi Centre in question.

2. Facts of the case may be briefly stated.

3. Petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Caste community and is Higher Secondary pass. Petitioner is also a married lady. She is therefore eligible to be appointed as Anganwadi Worker.

4. An advertisement dated 19.9.2009 was issued by the Child Development Project Officer(CDPO), Mayang ICDS Project in the district of Morigaon (respondent No.4) inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Anganwadi Worker and Anganwadi Helper in the Khartolabori Nabajyoti Sangha Anganwadi Centre No.309 (Anganwadi Centre). Petitioner applied for Anganwadi Worker pursuant to the said advertisement alongwith other candidates. Interview was held on 27.10.2009.

5. Respondent No.4 published a select list dated 23.12.2009. Respondent No.7 was selected for appointment as Anganwadi Worker whereafter she was appointed.

6. According to the petitioner, as per clause(2) of the advertisement dated 19.9.2009, a candidate must be a local resident within the jurisdictional area of the Anganwadi Centre. Respondent No.7 is a resident of No.5 Village Jhargaon (Farm) under mouza Mayang and her residence is outside the jurisdictional area of the Anganwadi Centre. In fact, residence of respondent No.7 lies within the jurisdictional area of another Anganwadi Centre, namely, No.308 Jhargaon Krishi Farm Anganwadi Centre.

7. Petitioner filed WP( C) No.685/2010 before this Court challenging the selection and appointment of respondent No.7 on the ground that respondent No.7 did not fulfil the eligibility criteria for such selection and appointment since her residence is outside the jurisdictional area of the Anganwadi Centre. This Court by order dated 2.2.2012 disposed of the writ petition by directing respondent No.2 (Director of Social Welfare, Assam) to verify the complaint of the petitioner regarding residence of respondent No.7 and to decide the said issue after giving hearing to both the parties during the verification exercise. This Court held that continuance of respondent No.7 would be subject to the result of the exercise by the Director.

8. It appears that as per direction of respondent No.2, District Social Welfare Officer, Marigaon submitted verification report regarding residential status of the petitioner and respondent No.7. According to the petitioner, as per the report of District Social Welfare Officer, the Anganwadi Centre is located at Jaha Kharbari village where the residence of the petitioner is situated whereas respondent No.7 is a resident of Jhargaon village which is not covered by the Anganwadi Centre. Instead of accepting the report of the District Social Welfare Officer, respondent No.2 passed an order dated 6.8.2012 directing the CDPO to make a proper survey of the Anganwadi Centre of the area.

9. CDPO thereafter submitted the survey register of the Anganwadi Centre. Respondent No.2 by his order dated 6.9.2012 observed that in the survey register residence of both the petitioner and that of respondent No.7 are found within the jurisdictional area of the Anganwadi Centre. Thus, claim of the petitioner was rejected and respondent No.7 has been allowed to continue as Anganwadi Worker.

10. Aggrieved, petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking the reliefs as indicated above.

11. Responde

Click Here to Read the rest of this document