The main legal point established in the judgment is that the allocation of marks for the selection process must be in accordance with the prescribed criteria and should not suffer from any illegality. Additionally, a candidate who has appeared in the interview may be estopped from challenging the selection and appointment of another candidate.

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing selection of respondent No. 5 to the post of Anganbari Worker. A further direction has been sought to direct the respondents to make the selection on the basis of instructions dated 13.3.2006 (P-1).

2. Brief facts of the case are that the Child Development Project Officer, Julana, District Jind, invited applications for the post of Anganbari Worker at Fatehgarh, Tehsil Julana, District Jind. The petitioner as well as respondent No. 5 applied for the aforementioned post. The petitioner was called for interview on 11.5.2006. Interviews were conducted by a duly constituted Selection Committee and respondent No. 5 has been appointed as Anganbari Worker. The petitioner, who has remained unsuccessful in the selection process espouses her grievance by submitting that in the interview she has been awarded only four marks whereas respondent No. 5 has been awarded 9 marks out of 10.

3. This Court has already considered the criteria of selection of Anganwari Workers in the case of Kanta Devi v. State of Haryana and others, (CWP No. 10428 of 2006, decided on 14.7.2006) and held that the same does not suffer from any such illegality which would leave any room for Selection Committee to act arbitrarily. It is appropriate to mention that detailed procedure for holding selection of Anganwari Worker has been provided by a letter/instructions dated 13.3.2006 (P-1), issued by the Director, Women & Child Development Department, Haryana to all the Child Development Project Officers in the State of Haryana. The allocation of marks have been stipulated in the instructions dated 13.3.2006 (P-1), which have been adopted and followed in the selection process while filling up the posts of Anganwari Workers.

4. The petitioner, who has remained unsuccessful in the selection process espouses her grievance by submitting that in the interview she has been awarded less marks whereas respondent No. 5 has been awarded more marks. Challenge to the appointment of respondent No. 5 has been made on the ground that the petitioner is more meritorious and having higher educational qualification than respondent No. 5, inasmuch as, the petitioner has passed 10+2 examination and possess Certificate issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of Women and Child Development, Government of India, regarding training on fruit and vegetable preservation and nutrition, conducted by Food and Nutrition Board, whereas respondent No. 5 is stated to have passed matriculation examination only. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the allocation of 10 marks for interview leaves determinative discretion in the hands of the Selection Committee to invert the relevant consideration arbitrarily.

5. We have thoughtfully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and are of the view that the instant petition is devoid of any merit. The criteria adopted for allocation of marks, must be considered at the first instance, which is laid down in the instructions dated 13.3.2006 (P-1), issued by the Director, Women & Child Development Department, Haryana to all the Child Development Project Officer in the State of Haryana. The relevant portion of the aforementioned instructions reads as under :-

"Sr.No. Eligibility Marks 1. Eligibility of Martic base 60 marks (See point "A") 2. Additional Eligibility 5 Marks (See point "B") 3. Special Preference 15 Marks (See point "C") 4. Experience 10 Marks (See point "D") 5. Interview 10 Marks TOTAL 100 Marks

Eligibility "A"

Whichever the concern of the eligibility, 60 Marks of eligibility of Matric be given as per following norms :

Sr. No. Eligibility Marks 1. Women who have the eligibility of middle pass 35 2. Below 40% in matric but pass in matric 40 3. 40% or more but below 50% in matric 45 4. 50% or more but below 60% in matric 50 5. 60% or more but below 75% in matric 55 6. 75% or more in matric 60

Additional Eligi