The appeal process as per Government Order No. 07 SW of 2010 is the appropriate mechanism to address disputed residence issues in Anganwadi worker selection.

JUDGMENT :

1. The Child Development Project Officer (ICDS) Project, Ramsoo, vide Advertisement Notice No. DIP/J-625, dated 28.04.2008, invited applications from the eligible female candidates for engagement as Anganwadi workers on honorarium basis for Anganwadi Centres in the different Panch constituencies falling under ICDS Project (Ramsoo) Ukhral.

2. The petitioner being eligible and belonging to ST category also applied for the post of Anganwadi worker advertised for Anganwadi Centre at Ward No. 1, Mohalla Batroo, Panchayat Halqa, Phagmulla.

3. As per the criteria laid down in the advertisement notice, the applicant must be a permanent resident of J&K State and also belonging to the concerned Panchayat in rural area or concerned ward in urban area where the Anganwadi centre is located. Only those candidates who are residing in the concerned Panchayat constituency ward shall be eligible to apply and no qualification ban for reserved categories was prescribed. The petitioner belonging to Scheduled Category applied for the said post and along with her application, she also annexed her residence certificate issued by the Block Development Officer, Ramsoo. The residence certificates issued by the Numberdar of Halqa Pogal and Halqa Panchal along with the residence certificate issued by the Chowkidar of Halqa Pogal were also submitted.

4. It is contended that along with the petitioner, two more candidates namely Sakeena Begum (petitioner's sister) and respondent No. 5, Mst. Zaitoon Begum W/o Mohd. Rafiq R/o Batroo Phagmula, Tehsil Banihal, District Ramban also applied for the post of Anganwadi worker in the said centre. The petitioner appeared before the Selection Committee and was accordingly interviewed for the post. The selection list was published on 22.09.2008 in the news paper, however, the selection for the post of Anganwadi Worker at Anganwadi Centre, Batroo (ST) was withheld. It appears that the reason for withholding the post was that the respondent No. 5 had raised the dispute regarding the residence of the petitioner. The petitioner immediately thereafter inquired from respondents, who informed her that an objection was raised by private respondent No. 5 regarding her residence. It is submitted by the petitioner that she has been informed that Selection Committee had awarded her highest points, i.e. 22.75, whereas respondent No. 5 had only obtained 20.52 points, respondent No. 3 was given only 18.52 points. The petitioner thus got the highest points amongst other candidates for being selected and appointed as Anganwadi worker for Anganwadi Centre, Batroo (ST) of Panchayat Halqa, Phagmula.

5. The petitioner was, however, informed that the Block Development Officer, Ramsoo has written a letter, cancelling her residence certificate. It is urged that without giving her any opportunity of being heard the concerned Block Development Officer has cancelled her residence certificate, the same is arbitrary, illegal and is also violative of principles of natural justice. The petitioner thus seeks a direction for quashing the letter issued by respondent No. 6 whereby the residence certificate issued to the petitioner stands cancelled. The petitioner further seeks a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and 6 to select and appoint her as Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Centre, Batroo (ST) Panch constituency Ward No. 1 of Panchayat Halqa, Phagmula with all consequential benefits.

6. The contention of the petitioner is that she submitted a certificate issued by the Block Development Officer, Ramsoo which certified that she is a resident of Panch Constituency, Batroo, ward No. 1, Panchayat Phagmulla of Block Ramsoo. This certificate was submitted by her to the respondents along with her documents. The respondents, however, informed her that the residence certificate issued by the Block Development Officer, Ramban stands cancelled.

7. It is stated that despite petitioner's repeated requests the B.D.O., Ramsoo did not issue the