ORDER :

Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.

1. The present appeal is filed under Section 2 of MP Uchha Nyayalaya Khandnyayapeeth Ko Appeal Adhiniyam, 2005 being aggrieved by the order dated 20.11.2023 passed by learned Single Judge in WP No.7048/2011 and also the order dated 06.12.2023 passed in the review petition no.1309/2023.

2. The appellant was not a party to the original writ petition, which was filed by the respondent no.6/Shanaz Bano, which has been allowed by the learned Single Judge. Against the said order, the appellant, who was not a party to the writ petition, filed the review petition, which has been dismissed by order dated 06.12.2023. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the present intra-court appeal has been filed.

3. The appellant was appointed on the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta for ward no.5 Garoth District Mandsaur in the year 1966. Thereafter, she was appointed on the post of Anganwadi Worker in the year 2016 for ward no.5 Garoth District, Mandsaur. The appellant was appointed by order dated 19.12.2016. In the appointment order, it was mentioned that the appointment of the petitioner shall be subject to final outcome of the writ petition no.5045/2010.

4. The said petition WP No.5045/2010 was filed by the respondent no.6/Shanaz Bano, challenging the order dated 25.10.2010 filed being aggrieved by not deciding the representation of the petitioner of the writ petition in the said petition.

5. The said petition was disposed of, directing the respondent no.3 of the said writ petition to decide the representation within the period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

6. The said representation was rejected by the order dated 25.10.2010 directing the respondent no.4 to take steps for cancellation of the appointment of the respondent no.6/writ petitioner in the said petition on the post of Anganwadi Worker. Being aggrieved by the said order, the respondent no.6 filed the appeal before the respondent no.2 and the said appeal was also dismissed by order dated 01.08.2011.

7. The learned Single Judge considered the following facts of the said case as under:-

7.1 The District Programme Officer, Women & Child Development, Mandsaur issued an advertisement dated 27.07.2009 for appointment to the post of Aanganwadi Worker and Aanganwadi Assistant in newly sanctioned 342 Aanganwadi Centres. The petitioner submitted an application for Aanganwadi Centre, Garod, Ward No.6, she was selected and an appointment order dated 14.10.2009 was issued by the Project Officer. Thereafter, the petitioner was orally directed to work in Aanganwadi Centre situated at Ward No.5, and thereafter, vide order dated 06.03.2010, the Project Officer directed the petitioner to work in Aanganwadi Centre, Ward No.5.

7.2 The petitioner submitted a representation that she cannot be compelled to work at Ward No.5, where Archana Soni is already working. When the representation was not decided, the petitioner filed a writ petition i.e. W.P. No.5045 of 2010 and vide order dated 17.05.2010, writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Collector to decide the representation.

7.3 Vide order dated 25.10.2010, the Collector considered matter in totality and found that petitioner has wrongly been appointed at Ward No.6 as no post of Aanganwadi Worker was vacant. The Project Officer wrongly issued the advertisement for Ward No.6 because Archana Soni was already working by virtue of appointment order dated 14.08.2006 and accordingly, directed the Project Officer to initiate the process for cancellation of appointment of the petitioner. The Collector also directed for initiation of disciplinary action against the concerned Clerk for issuing the advertisement for Ward No.6.

7.4 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner and the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 01.08.2011. Hence, the present petition is before this Court. 7.5 After notice, respondents / State filed a reply by