Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(J&K) 120

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
TASHI RABSTAN, M.A. CHOWDHARY, JJ.

Shazia Akhter, D/o. Mohammad Ramzan Sheikh - Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir, Through Commissioner-cum-Secretary to Government, Social Welfare Department, Civil Secretariat and Ors. – Respondents
LPA No. 187 of 2022 in SWP No. 1960 of 2016
Decided On : 07-05-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Asif Ahmad Bhat.
For the Respondents: Mr. Mubashir Majid Malik, Mr. Mian Tufail.

The court upheld the validity of the enquiry reports and found no illegality or infirmity in the impugned Judgment.

Headnote:
Enquiry Reports - Engagement of Anganwadi Worker - SWP No. 1960/2016, SWP No. 2368/2011 - The Judgment discusses the engagement of an Anganwadi Worker and the residential status of the parties involved. It refers to the directions passed in SWP No. 2368/2011 and the subsequent enquiry reports. The court found no illegality or infirmity in the impugned Judgment and dismissed the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the engagement of an Anganwadi Worker and the residential status of the parties. The Appellant challenged the enquiry reports and the subsequent disengagement and engagement decisions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no illegality or infirmity in the impugned Judgment and dismissed the appeal.
Issues: The issues involved the engagement of the Appellant as an Anganwadi Worker, the residential status of the parties, and the validity of the enquiry reports.
Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the validity of the enquiry reports and found no illegality or infirmity in the impugned Judgment.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the interim direction(s) were vacated. No order as to costs.

JUDGMENT :

M.A. Chowdhary, J.

1. Through the medium of the instant intra Court appeal, the Appellant has assailed the Judgment dated 9th of September, 2022 passed by the learned Writ Court in the Writ Petition filed by her bearing SWP No. 1960/2016 titled ‘Mst. Shazia Akhtar v. State of J&K and Ors.’

2. Before we advert to the grounds urged by the Appellant in relation to the aforesaid impugned Judgment, it shall be advantageous to take note of the material facts of the case leading to the filing of the present appeal, hereinbelow.

3. The Appellant claims to have been engaged as an Anganwadi Worker in Doligund Masjid Mohalla, Sheikh Mohalla, District Baramulla in terms of Order No. CDPO/Rf/Esstt/11/51-54-A dated 23rd of August, 2011; that the Appellant submitted her joining report before the concerned authority on 24th of August, 2011 and has been regularly discharging her duties as such since then; that the said selection/engagement of the Appellant came to be challenged by one Tasleema Bano/Respondent No.7 herein through the medium of Writ Petition bearing SWP No. 2368/2011, which was disposed of vide Order dated 25th of August, 2016, with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Baramulla to appoint a Senior Revenue Officer as Enquiry Officer, so as to ascertain the residential status of the Petitioner therein/Respondent No.7 herein, after affording opportunity of being heard to both the parties; that it was further directed that if in the enquiry, it is found that the Petitioner therein/Respondent No.7 herein does not belong to Sheikh Mohalla, Masjid Mohalla of Village Doligund, then the engagement of the private Respondent/Appellant herein shall remain undisturbed and she shall continue to work as Anganwadi Worker, however, if in the enquiry, it is found that the Petitioner therein/Respondent No.7 herein is also a resident of Sheikh Mohalla, Masjid Mohalla of Village Doligund, in such eventuality, the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 shall consider the comparative merit of both the candidates and appoint/engage the meritorious one as Anganwadi Worker.

4. In compliance of the aforesaid directions, the Tehsildar, Watergam, in terms of communication dated 28th of November, 2016, submitted the enquiry report wherein it was reported that there is no geographical boundaries between the houses of the Appellant and the Respondent No.7 and that they are residents of one and the same Hamlet viz. Masjid Mohalla/Sheikh Mohalla; that, thereafter, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sopore, vide communication No. SDM/Spr/C/2016-17/399 dated 1st of December, 2016, reported that after spot inspection of the site, it was found that both the residential houses of the Appellant and Respondent No.7 are almost equidistant from the Masjid and the Anganwadi Centre in question.

5. The Appellant, being aggrieved of the aforesaid reports submitted by the official Respondents, challenged the same through the medium of Writ Petition bearing SWP No. 1960/2016; that on notice having been issued by the learned Writ Court, the Respondents appeared and submitted Objections in opposition to the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant, whereafter, the learned Writ Court, in terms of Judgment dated 9th of September, 2022, considered the matter and disposed of the Writ Petition with the following observations:

“11. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the Enquiry Committee has rightly observed that the appointment needs to be made on the basis of the merit of the Petitioner and the private Respondent. Be that as it may, this Writ Petition is disposed of in light of the Judgment passed by this Court on 25.08.2016 in SWP No. 2368/2011, with a direction to the Respondent Nos. 2-4/official respondents to assess the comparative merit of the Petitioner as well as the private respondent and pass appropriate orders of engagement in favour of the meritorious candidate within a period of four weeks from the date certified copy of this order is made available to the respondent/aut