(1.) THE present petition is filed questioning the appointment of Respondent No. 2, as an Anganawadi worker while negating the application of the petitioner.
(2.) THE primary contention of the petitioner is to the effect that the petitioner was more meritorious than the second respondent and therefore, her merit could not have been overlooked in appointing the second respondent instead of the petitioner.
(3.) THIS circumstance is not seriously disputed by the petitioner Since the primary condition of residence is not met by the petitioner, rejection of the petitioner's application is in order. Therefore, there is no warrant for interference. The petition is dismissed.