IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MAULIK J.SHELAT, J.
Chamar Pinalben Ranchhodbhai (Solanki Pinalben Ketankumar) – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat & Ors. – Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 12879 of 2020
Decided On : 01-05-2026
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. K. B. Pujara, learned advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Siddharth Rami, learned AGP for the respondent-State, Mr. U. M. Shastri, learned advocate for respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and Mr. B. Y. Mankad, learned advocate for Respondent No. 6, at length.
1.1 RULE returnable forthwith. Learned advocates appearing for the respondents waive service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respective respondents.
2. The present writ petition is filed under Articles 14, 16, 19, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:-
“9(a) to admit this petition and to issue Notice for final disposal on returnable date;
9(b) to direct the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the Merit-list and in the selection-list at Sr. No.1 as her Merit 60.057 is more than all the candidates named in the impugned merit-list, and to give appointment to the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker at at JETPUR-1 ANGANWADI at Vadagam, Tal: Khanpur, Dist: Mahisagar, pursuant to the Advertisement at Annexure-A and the petitioner's application as per Annexure-B;
9(c) to quash and set aside the impugned illegal action of the Respondents in rejecting the petitioner's application for the post of Anganwadi Worker at JETPUR-1 ANGANWADI at Vadagam, Tal: Khanpur, Dist: Mahisagar, as per Annexure- E;
9(d) to direct that the appointment be given to the petitioner with all the consequential benefits as if the petitioner was given appointment instead of the Resp. No. 6 on 14-9-2020
9(e) to quash and set aside the impugned actions of the respondents in giving appointment to the Resp. No. 6 herein instead of giving it to the petitioner;
9(f) PENDING THE HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL OF THIS PETITION, BE PLEASED to restrain the respondent no. 6 from functioning as Anganwadi Worker at JETPUR-1 ANGANWADI at Vadagam, Tal Khanpur, Dist: Mahisagar, pursuant to the impugned illegal order dtd. 14-9-2020
9(g) PENDING THE HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL OF THIS PETITION, BE PLEASED to direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker at JETPUR-1 ANGANWADI at Vadagam, Tal: Khanpur, Dist: Mahisagar, subject to further orders of this Hon'ble Court;
9(h) PENDING THE HEARING AND FINAL DISPOSAL OF THIS PETITION, BE PLEASED to direct respondents to keep one post of Anganwadi Worker vacant for the petitioner pursuant to the Advertisement at Annexure-A;
9(i) to direct the Resp. No. 3 DDO to pay the costs of this petition to the petitioner;
9(j) to grant any appropriate and just relief/s.”
SHORT FACTS:-
3. The petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Caste category and possesses the educational qualifications of B.A., M.A., B.Ed. and M.Ed. and is eligible / qualified to be appointed to the post of Anganwadi worker. It is further the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the Advertisement dated 24.07.2020, the petitioner submitted her application for the post of Anganwadi worker, Jetpur-1 at Vadgam, Taluka - Khanpur, District Mahisagar on 05.08.2020. The petitioner’s mark-sheets for all four semesters of M.A. showed Grade/Score. The petitioner obtained the actual marks of all the semesters from the concerned University vide certificate dated 07.08.2020, but was unable to upload the said certificate before the cut-off date, i.e., 13.08.2020, as given in the advertisement.
3.1 It is further stated by the petitioner that due to such difficulty, the petitioner's husband - Ketankumar Babubhai Solanki, contacted the helpline number provided in the advertisement for the Mahisagar District and sought guidance for uploading such certificate. As per the Advice from the helpline, such certificate can be produced at the time of document verification, and thus petitioner patiently waited up to publication of the result. The respondent published the merit-list online on 27.08.2020, wherein the name of the petitioner was not reflected, though she is meritorious and would have stood first above respondent No.6 herein.
3.2 Being aggrieved by wrong rejection of her app


Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.