Candidates cannot challenge a selection process after participating in it, as established by previous court decisions.

JUDGMENT

B.R. Sarangi, J. - The petitioner-Kapura Murmu, a resident of village-Hidigan, belonging to scheduled tribe community, has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 16.11.2011 in Annexure-1 passed by the Sub-Collector, Balasore rejecting the representation filed by her in SSW Misc. Case No.12 of 2011 holding that she is not eligible as per government guidelines for engagement as Anganwadi Helper in Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre.

2. The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Sadar, Balasore issued an advertisement on 04.09.2010 vide Annexure-2 inviting applications from the eligible candidates to participate in the selection process for engagement as Anganwadi Helper in respect of Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre belonging to scheduled caste community. Pursuant to such advertisement, the petitioner, opposite party no.5 and one Kuntala Sheet applied for the post of Anganwadi Helper in respect of Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre. As per the rules mentioned in the advertisement, the candidate must belonged to the Anganwadi Centre area and she must be a permanent resident of that area and must produce the certificate from the Tahasildar, which would be valid for a period of six months. The age of the candidate must be between 18 and 42 years, and by 01.01.2010 she should have completed 18 years of age and should not have exceeded 42 years of age. In support of her age, she must produce necessary certificate and also produce the certificates with regard to educational qualification, photo identity card or a certificate from the government doctor with regard to proof of age. It was also mentioned that the candidate would be selected from that category of people the population of which is more in the Anganwadi Centre area, and especially, in case of selection of Anganwadi Helper of scheduled caste, scheduled tribe, other backward caste and others, the ORV Act and Rules would be applicable. It was further indicated that preferential treatment would be given to a candidate if she would be widow, deserted, divorced, but to that extent necessary certificate from the competent authority was to be produced.

2.1 The applications of three candidates, who had applied for the post of Anganwadi Helper in Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre, were scrutinized. As the scheduled caste community people is more in Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre area, as per the guidelines, opposite party no.5, being only candidate from that category, was engaged as Anganwadi Helper after following due procedure. The selection and engagement of opposite party no.5 was challenged by the petitioner before the Sub-Collector, Balasore, by way of representation, which was registered as SSW Misc. Case No. 12 of 2011. The Sub-Collector, Balasore, after giving due opportunity of hearing, came to a define conclusion taking into consideration the proceedings of Mahila Sabha held on 30.12.2010 for selection of Anganwadi Helper in Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre, the survey list of Anganwadi Centre area and other allied papers appended to the case record, that in the said Anganwadi Centre area majority of scheduled caste community people are residing. Though the petitioner and opposite party no.5 are resident of Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre and the petitioner belonged to scheduled tribe community whereas opposite party no.5 belonged to scheduled caste community, as per the government guidelines, since majority population of Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre area belonged to scheduled caste community, the selection of opposite party no.5 is well justified and thereby rejected the representation filed by the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Mr. Panda, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. P.K. Satpathy, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that engagement of opposite party no.5 as Anganwadi Helper in respect of Hidigan-7 Anganwadi Centre is beyond the government guidelines and, as such, the genuine claim of the petitioner for th