APHC010648192013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3457]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24331/2013 Between:

1. M .LAKSHMI, W/O.M.NAGARAJU,, OCC:UN-EMPLOYEE, R/O.

GADEKAL VILLAGE, VIDAPANAKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ANANTAPUR, -

2. T HE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT WOMAN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, ANANTAPUR.

3. T HE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

4. T HE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, URAVAKONDA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

5. B HARATHI DEVI W/O CHINNAKESAVULU, AGE:MAJOR, R/O.

GADEKAL VILLAGE, VIDAPANAKAL MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No.1 to 4 in selecting the 5th respondent to the post of Anganavadi Worker in respect of Gadekal Village, Vidapanakal Mandal of Anantapur District in the selections made on 29-03-2013 though the petitioner is meritorious than the 5th respondent in all aspects is illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of Art.14 and 21 of the Constitution of India consequently set-aside the 5th respondent selection and appoint the petitioner in the place of 5th respondent in the interest of justice IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 29941 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to appoint any candidate as Anganavadi worker in respect of Gadekal Village, Vidapanakal Mandal of Anantapur District in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. S D GOWD Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE

2. R ANNAPURNA

3. GP FOR WOMEN DEV, CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following:

ORDER:

It is informed that the learned counsel for the petitioner has passed away.

2. It is also informed that the cause in the writ petition does not survive, as the petitioner is challenging the appointment of the 5^th respondent as Anganwadi Worker instead of appointing the petitioner.

3. It is stated in the affidavit that the petitioner secured more marks in the 10^th Class examination than the 5^th respondent. However, respondent Nos.

1 to 4 have preferred the 5^th respondent for the post of Anganwadi Worker.

4. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is submitted that the 5^th respondent was selected after following the recommendation of the Selection Committee.

5. It is further submitted that weightage for S.S.C. marks was appropriately awarded, and apart from the weightage marks for the S.S.C. examination, the Selection Committee has also granted 05 marks towards handicapped weightage and 04 marks in the interview insofar as the petitioner is concerned. However, the 5^th respondent was awarded 12 marks in the interview, and on overall merit, the 5^th respondent secured 38 marks as compared to 30.25 marks secured by the petitioner. Accordingly, the

5^th respondent was selected and appointment orders were duly issued.

6. Considering the same, no further orders are required to be passed in this writ petition.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 23.03.2026 PNS