The eligibility criteria for appointment as Anganwadi Sevika must be strictly adhered to, especially concerning family employment.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 23-12-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following reliefs :-

“(a) For setting aside the order dated

16.7.2013 passed by the respondent no.2 in Misc. Appeal No.178/12-13 by which he has rejected the claim of the petitioner for her selection on the post of Anganbari Sevika of Gram Panchayat Raj Tari, Anchal-

Raghunathpur, District-Siwan.

(b) For a direction to cancel the selection of Respondent No.9 on the post of Anganbari Sevika on the ground that her daughter is Government Servant i.e. Teacher in Government School which is against the eligibility criteria fixed by the Government for appointment on the post of Sevika or Sahayika.

(c) For a direction to the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner on the post of Sevika in Gram Panchayat Raj Tari, Anchal-

Raghunathpur, District-Siwan.

(d) For any other relief or reliefs.”

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that she along with six other persons filed an application for appointment on the post of Anganwadi Sevika of Gram Panchayat Raj Tari, Circle- Raghunathpur in the district of Siwan.

4. The Aam Sabha of the Gram Panchayat was held on

5.4.2007 under the presidentship of the Mukhiya wherein a merit list of the seven applicants was prepared.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that while Anju Devi and Kanti Devi did not appear for counselling, the other candidates namely Geeta Kumari, Ramawati Devi and Poonam Priyadarshini were disqualified as per the Guidelines for appointment of Anganwadi Sevika on one ground or the other of their husband, son or unmarried daughter being in Government employment. As such it is submitted that the petitioner was the only candidate having the requisite qualification for appointment. Even the unmarried daughter of respondent no.9 being a Panchayat Sikshak in the Government Girls Primary School, the respondent no.9 was not entitled for appointment on the post of Anganwadi Sevika.

6. The petitioner moved this Court earlier in CWJC no.14636 of 2007 which was disposed of by order dated 18.12.2009 directing the Collector, Siwan to dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a time frame.

7. The case of the petitioner is that the representation/appeal of the petitioner was registered by the Collector as Miscellaneous Appeal Case no.178/12-13. Having heard the parties and having perused the material on record, the Collector, Siwan was pleased to reject the said case by his order dated 16.7.2013, impugned herein.

8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not disqualified as per Clause-3 of the Guidelines brought on record as Annexure-2 to the writ application.

9. The application is opposed by learned counsel for the respondents who submits that having heard the petitioner and having considered the contents of her petition, the appeal/case filed by her was rejected by the Collector, Siwan by order dated 16.7.2013 which is a detailed order having dealt with all the points raised by both the sides.

10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

11. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioner along with six others having applied for appointment on the post of Anganwadi Sevika of Gram Panchayat Raj Tari. Further the Aam Sabha having been held on 5.4.2007, the respondent no.9 was appointed as an Anganwadi Sevika.

12. The earlier application (CWJC no.14636 of 2007)

filed by the petitioner was disposed of with a direction to the Collector, Siwan to decide the case of the petitioner. It is pursuant thereto that the Collector –cum– District Magistrate, Siwan considered the case/appeal filed by the petitioner and b