DEVSHRI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Aanganwadi Worker/Sahayika vide order dtd. 31/5/2022 at Aanganwadi Centre Tetartoli, Gram Panchayat-Bhulsikala, Janpad Panchayat Kushami, District-Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). He would further submit that complaints were made before the Collector and the Collector vide order dtd. 22/7/2022 cancelled the recruitment process including appointment orders issued in favour of 10 Anganwadi Workers, 5 mini Anganwadi Workers and 20 Anganwadi Sahayika. The Collector also directed the Recruitment Agency to complete the recruitment process within a period of 15 days. Mr. Pandey would also submit that without affording any opportunity of hearing and without issuance of any notice, the appointment of the petitioner was cancelled and respondent No.5 was appointed on the post of Anganwadi Worker/Sahayika vide order dtd. 23/9/2022. He would contend that as the petitioner was appointed pursuant to the Constitutional mandate, therefore, the authority concerned ought to have provided an opportunity of hearing.

(3.) On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respective respondent would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. He would submit that there are serious complaints with regard to the recruitment process adopted by the authorities therefore, the Collector vide order dtd. 22/7/2022 took a decision to cancel all appointments. They would further contend that thereafter, the Recruitment Agency invited objections and it was found that respondent No.5 was meritorious to the petitioner, therefore, the appointment order was issued in favour of respondent No.5. They would also submit that there is no irregularity or illegality in the appointment order issued in favour of respondent No.5. It is contended that pursuant to the order passed by the Collector, objections were decided by the Committee. It is contended that the present petition deserves to be dismissed.