Writ of certiorari does not permit re-evaluation of evidence but ensures adherence to natural justice; findings of fact can only be overturned if shown to lack basis.

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

1. The petitioner in the present writ application seeks the following relief:

“It is therefore prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to consider the facts stated in this writ application, may admit the same, call for the records, and issue notice to the Opp. Parties calling upon them to show cause as to why this writ application shall not be allowed the order dated 30.09.24-vide Annexure-14, the order dated 17.12.24 passed by the OP No.4, vide Annexure-17 shall not be quashed, and the this petitioner shall not be allowed to continue as Anganwadi Worker for Phatamunda Anganwadi Centre being the selected candidate. If the Opp. Parties fails to show cause or shows insufficient cause, then this writ application may be allowed, order dated 30.09.24 order vide Annexure-14 and the order dated 17.12.24 passed by OP No.4, vide Annexure-17 may be quashed and the OP No. 4 may be directed to continue this petitioner as Anganwadi Workers of Phatamunda Anganwadi Centre who has been working as Anganwadi Worker for last 3 years being the selected candidate.

And/Or pass such other order/orders, writ/writs, director/directions as your lordships may this just and proper:

And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall ever pray.”

2. The facts of the case are that on 16-09-2021, the C.D.P.O., Chandahandi in the district of Nawarangpur issued an advertisement for engagement of Anganwadi workers in 13 Anganwadi centres, including Phatamunda Anganwadi Centre. The petitioner was one of the candidates, along with 11 others. The villagers objected to the candidatures of some of the candidates and so also Opposite Party No.5. Accordingly, a joint committee was formed to enquire whether the candidates belong to the Anganwadi Centre area or not. On enquiry, it was found that the petitioner and three other persons belong to the Anganwadi Centre area. The C.D.P.O. also directed the concerned Anganwadi Worker and Supervisor to submit details. A joint report was submitted giving the house number and family number of the candidates belonging to the Centre area, wherein the name of the petitioner was at serial No.3. The selection committee found that only four candidates, including the petitioner belong to the service area. A merit list was prepared wherein the petitioner was found to have secured the highest marks. Therefore, she was selected and issued with the order of engagement on 30.12.2021. She joined on 31.12.2021 in the Anganwadi Centre. Her selection was challenged by Opposite Party No.5 before this Court in W.P.(C). No. 852 of 2002, which was disposed of by order dated 08.02.2022 granting liberty to her to prefer appeal. She preferred appeal, being Appeal No. 6 of 2022 before the ADM, Nawarangpur, claiming that the petitioner does not belong to the Anganwadi Centre area. The petitioner appeared pursuant to notice of the appeal and took the plea that the mother-in-law of O.P. No.5, being the Anganwadi Worker of Palaspani Centre, deliberately inserted the name of the petitioner in that area. However, the same was struck down and the name of the petitioner was added to the Phatamunda Centre area. The CDPO also submitted a detailed report on 23.09.2022 stating that the petitioner is residing in the service area of the Centre. In another report submitted by the CDPO on 30.06.2024, it was stated that originally there was one Anganwadi Centre at Phatamunda covering the whole area, including Palaspani Mini Anganwadi Centre, which was created in 2012. At that time, the petitioner was residing at Chacharpada under Phatamunda village.