Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SASHIKANTA MISHRA
Gandharbi Pathrimali @ Manjulata Budek – Appellant
Versus
Collector, Balangir – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court judgment on writ petition. (Para 1) |
| 2. factual background of the petitioner's selection. (Para 2) |
| 3. court analysis of evidence regarding residence. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 4. petitioner's argument on her residential status. (Para 4) |
| 5. opposite party's argument against petitioner's status. (Para 5) |
| 6. court's conclusion on the a.d.m.'s findings. (Para 7) |
| 7. order to set aside the a.d.m. ruling. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
The Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief;
(i) Why the order dtd.22.04.2015 passed by the learned Addl. District Magistrate, Balangir in AWW Appeal No.07 of 2011 shall not be quashed.
If the Opp. parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause then the rule may kindly be made absolute.
And for which act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”
3. Heard Mr. Trilochan Nanda, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. A.R. Dash, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State. There is no appearance on behalf of Opposite Party No.5 despite repeated calls.
5. Mr.A.R.Dash, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, would argue that as per the guidelines, an applicant has to be permanent resident of the service area of the Anganwadi
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
