Non-uploading of required documents does not disqualify a candidate who meets all eligibility criteria and is more meritorious than others.

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

1. The petitioner in the present writ petition questions the correctness of order dated 04.07.2025 passed by the Revenue Divisional Commissioner (Central Division), Cuttack in AWW Misc. Appeal No. 4 of 2024 whereby the selection of Opposite Party No.5 as Anganwadi Worker of Senanda Anganwadi center was upheld.

2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that an advertisement was issued on 25.09.2023 by the CDPO, Dasarathpur in the district of Jajpur inviting applications from intending candidates for engagement as Anganwadi worker of different Anganwadi centers including Senanda Center under Biruhan Gram Panchayat. It was stipulated in the advertisement that the minimum educational qualification of the candidates must be 12th pass and that the merit list is to be prepared on the basis of marks secured in the said examination.

3. Pursuant to such advertisement, the petitioner submitted her application along with other applicants including Opposite Party No. 5. On 13.10.2023, a verification was conducted wherein the petitioner appeared and produced all necessary documents and accordingly a list of eligible candidates was prepared and objections were invited.

4. The petitioner claims that at the time of verification, she had produced all her educational certificates including +2 and +3 mark sheets and certificates. No objection was filed submitted from any quarter. Out of 16 applicants, the petitioner and 5 others were found eligible.

5. According to the petitioner, the Opposite Party No.5 does not belong to the service area of the Anganwadi center, which is evident from the fact that the name of her husband is Santosh Kumar Nanda, who is a resident of Nandipur. By wrongly mentioning the name of her husband as Santosh Debata, she had filed the application, though there is no such person named, Sasmita Debata, wife of Santosh Debata residing within the service area. As such, Opposite Party No.5 was ineligible.

6. In the merit list published on 03.11.2023 by the Selection Committee, the petitioner though secured the 1st position with 60.83 points and Opposite Party No.5 secured the 2nd position with 52.33 points, the petitioner was not considered on the ground that she had not uploaded the +2 mark sheet in the engagement portal and the Opposite Party No.5 was thus appointed vide order dated 04.11.2023.

7. The petitioner challenged the selection and engagement of Opposite Party No.5 by filing appeal before the 1st Appellate Authority (ADM, Jajpur) being Anganwadi Misc. Appeal Case No.4 of 2023. The Appellate Authority, after considering the rival contentions held that the petitioner had submitted all the original documents during verification and no objection had been received against her candidature. She stood in the 1st position and therefore cancelling her candidature was illegal. Accordingly, the appointment of Opposite Party No.5 was set aside and the concerned authority was directed to disengage her and appoint the petitioner in her place. The petitioner was appointed on 24.06.2024 and is continuing till date.

8. Opposite No.5 approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 12288 of 2024 challenging the order of the Appellate Authority but by order dated 17.05.2024, this Court granted liberty to her to prefer Second Appeal. Pursuant to such order, Opposite Party No.5 preferred Second Appeal before the RDC, (Central Division), Cuttack.

9. The Second Appellate Authority after considering the rival contentions and the documents held that the petitioner had not uploaded her intermediate mark sheet in the online portal, which was contr