A disqualification clause barring the re-appointment of terminated employees in administrative circulars must be interpreted purposively; if the original termination was subsequently declared wrongful by a competent authority, it cannot be used to permanently debar the candidate from appointment.

C.A.V. Order

1. The petitioner is assailing the order dated 22.09.2023 passed in Case No. 83/A89/2021-22 by the learned Court of the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, Camp at Raigarh (Chhattisgarh), whereby the learned Additional Commissioner set aside the order dated 07.02.2023 passed by the Collector in Case No. 6/A89/2020-21 (dated 07.10.2022) and allowed the revision petition filed by respondent No.1. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present petition has been preferred seeking following reliefs :-

“10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue order/orders, writ/writs and direction/directions by set aside / quashing the order impugned dated 22-09-2023 passed by the Lt. Commissioner in R. Case no. 83/A-89/2021-22.

10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be issue direction and direct the respondent authority to strictly comply with orders / circulars of the State Govt.

10.3 Any other relief/relief's, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.”

2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the petitioner is a duly selected and working candidate on the post of Worker – Anganwadi at Mini Anganwadi Kendra, Lara–1, District Raigarh. She has been discharging her duties in accordance with the applicable rules and government policies. Initially, Respondent No.1 was selected and appointed as Worker – Anganwadi at Mini Anganwadi Kendra, Lara–1, District Raigarh. However, her services were terminated vide order dated 06.01.2017 passed by Respondent No.2 in Order No. 410/Est/A.BA.V.P.RE/2016-17. Aggrieved by the said termination, Respondent No.1 preferred an appeal before Respondent No.3, the Collector, Raigarh, registered as Appeal No. 96/A-89/2016-17, on various grounds. The said appeal was dismissed by Respondent No.3 vide order dated 27.06.2017. It is pertinent to mention that Respondent No.1 did not challenge the order dated 27.06.2017 passed by the Collector, Raigarh, before any higher forum. No appeal, revision, or petition was preferred thereafter, and consequently, the said order attained finality. Subsequently, the State Government again issued an advertisement inviting applications for the post of Worker – Anganwadi at Mini Anganwadi Kendra, Lara–1, District Raigarh. Respondent No.1, by suppressing the material fact of her earlier termination and dismissal of appeal, participated in the selection process and was appointed on the said post vide order dated 15.07.2020. Being aggrieved by the appointment of Respondent No.1, the petitioner preferred an appeal before Respondent No.3, the Collector, Raigarh, inter alia relying upon the State Government circulars dated 02.04.2008 and 25.01.2019, which govern eligibility and selection criteria for Anganwadi workers. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was allowed by Respondent No.3, the Collector, Raigarh, vide order dated 07.02.2022, whereby the appointment of Respondent No.1 was set aside. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 14.02.2022 before Respondent No. 2 seeking her appointment as a suitable and eligible candidate for the post of Worker – Anganwadi. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 appointed the petitioner on the post of Worker – Anganwadi at Mini Anganwadi Kendra,