JUDGMENT :

SINDHU SHARMA, J.

1. This Letters Patent Appeal (for short, “LPA”) has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 12.05.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition bearing SWP No. 2059/2009, titled “Shagufia Shaheen vs. State of J&K & Ors.”

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that, in response to an advertisement notice dated 17.02.2005 issued by the Social Welfare Department, applications were invited for engagement of Anganwadi Workers on honorarium basis for various centres, including Anganwadi Centre, Hangal Buch (Nadimarg). Respondent No. 4, namely Ms. Shagufta Shaheen, was selected and engaged as Anganwadi Worker at Anganwadi Centre, Nadimarg, during the first phase of expansion in October 2005. An order to this effect was issued on 03.10.2005, subject to certain terms and conditions.

3. It is stated that in a militancy-related incident in the year 2003, the inhabitants of village Nadimarg, belonging to the minority community, had to migrate to safer places. Consequently, the Anganwadi Centre at Nadimarg was shifted to Kokergund, and a new incumbent came to be engaged in place of respondent No. 4.

4. Aggrieved by the shifting of the Anganwadi Centre, respondent No. 4 approached this Court by filing SWP No. 625/2008, seeking a direction to allow her to discharge her duties as Anganwadi Worker at Anganwadi Centre, Nadimarg (Hangal Buch), to pay her honorarium from the date of engagement, and to restrain the respondents from disengaging her or shifting the Anganwadi Centre to another village.

5. During the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, the official respondents issued another advertisement notice dated 18.12.2009 under Phase-II relocation programme for various centres, including Panchayat Halqa Kathpora, Nadimarg. Respondent No. 4 did not apply pursuant to the said notice. The present appellant, Ms. Fatima Bano, being a resident of Kathpora and otherwise meritorious, applied and was selected under the said advertisement.

6. Respondent No. 4, feeling aggrieved, filed SWP No. 2059/2009 challenging the advertisement notice dated 18.12.2009, inter alia, on the ground that she had already been appointed as Anganwadi Worker at Nadimarg vide order dated 03.10.2005 and was continuing on the said post, and that the subsequent advertisement was arbitrary and intended to displace her.

7. The appellant as well as the official respondents filed objections before the learned Single Judge. It was contended that the advertisement dated 18.12.2009 had been issued under the Phase-II relocation programme for Panchayat Halqa Kathpora, Nadimarg, whereas respondent No. 4 was not a resident of the said Panchayat Halqa and, therefore, was ineligible to apply. It was further submitted that respondent No. 4 had already surrendered her claim under Phase-I engagement after the migration of population from Nadimarg, which fact was also evident from the affidavit sworn by her.

8. In support of her stand, the appellant placed reliance upon the communication dated 29.06.2016 issued by Tehsildar, Yaripora, in response to an RTI application, clarifying that Anganwadi Centre, Kathpora, falls under Revenue Village Kathpora and Panchayat Halqa Kathpora, whereas Hangal Buch falls under Revenue Village Hangal Buch and Panchayat Halqa Hangal Buch, thereby establishing that respondent No. 4 belonged to a different Panchayat Halqa.

9. The learned Single Judge, vide judgment dated 12.05.2016, allowed the writ petition (SWP No. 2059/2009 c SWP No. 625/2008) and held that respondent No. 4 had been duly appointed on 03.10.2005 against the available vacancy at Anganwadi Centre, Nadimarg, and continued on the said post. It was observed that there was no record or official communication to show that her appointment had ever been cancelled, rescinded, or that the Centre itself had been closed.

10. The learned Single Judge further held that no material was produced either by the official respondents or by