ORDER

28.11.2022 Heard Ms. B Bhuyan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. MD Bora, learned Junior Government Advocate for the authorities under the Social Welfare Department, Government of Assam and Mr. A Khound, learned counsel for the respondent No.7 being the Dhalpukhuri Gaon Panchayat, Ms. B Bora, learned counsel for the respondent No.8 being the Sarkari Gaonburha, Itakhula and Mr. AI Uddin, learned counsel for the respondent No.9, Soma Bhowmick.

2. Both the writ petitioner and the respondent No.9 participated in a selection process, amongst others, for the post of Anganwadi Worker of No.2 Itakhula Anganwadi Centre under the Dhol Pukhuri Block. The earlier litigation between the parties led to the order dated 26.05.2015 in WP(C)No.1888/2011, wherein there was a requirement of the Director of Social Welfare to give a hearing to both the writ petitioner and the respondent No.9 and to determine the dispute as to who is actually a resident within the territorial area of No.2 Itakhula Anganwadi Centre. In the resultant order dated 18.12.2015, the Director on one hand records that as per the report of the Divisional Programme Officer dated 26.08.2015, the respondent No.9 is a resident within the territorial area of No.2 Itakhula Anganwadi Centre, but in the succeeding paragraph it has been recorded that the petitioner has produced another certificate issued by the Government Gaonburah, Ampukhuri Itagaon wherein it has been mentioned that the respondent No.9 has obtained the residential certificate from him by furnishing false information before him. In other words, the certificate which led to the conclusion that the respondent No.9 is a resident within the territorial area of No.2 Itakhula Anganwadi Centre was obtained by her from the Government Gaonburah by giving false information. But a reading of the order does not make it discernible that the Director Social Welfare Assam has made any further enquiry as to whether the resident certificate was obtained by the respondent No.9 by giving the information that her husband Dulan Bhowmik was residing at the village Dhalpukhuri with his family and has been running hotel business at Itakhola since last 40(forty) years. The said information does not help in arriving at any conclusion as to whether the residential certificate relied upon by the respondent No.9 to show that she is a resident of No.2 Itakhula Anganwadi Centre which was obtained by her by providing false information as certified by the Government Gaonburah or it was obtained in a legitimate manner. Accordingly the order dated 18.12.2015 of the Director Social Welfare Assam is set aside and the matter stands remanded back to the Director for a fresh adjudication taking note of the certificate dated 12.01.2015 of the Government Gaonburah Itakhula with that of the certificate of the Government Gaonburah Ampukhuri, Itagaon which has been alleged to have been obtained by giving false information.

3. It is stated that in the meantime, the Directorate of Social Welfare has been bifurcated in two departments i.e. Directorate of Social Welfare and Directorate of Women and Child Development, Assam. As the matter pertains to the territorial area of a particular Anganwadi Centre, therefore the requirement of this order would be done by the Director of Women and Child Development Assam. The Director upon giving personal hearing to both the petitioner and the respondent No.9 shall arrive at his conclusion and pass a reasoned order on the issue involved in this writ petition.

4. The reasoned order be passed by the Director Women and Child Development Assam within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

5. The continuation of the respondent No.9 as the Anganwadi Worker of No.2 Itakhula Anganwadi Centre shall now depend upon the reasoned order that the Director may pass. If the order is in favour of the writ petitioner, the respondent No.9 would make way for further action and i