LAXMI GHUDASWAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment dismissing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is under challenge.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant, the learned Deputy Advocate General and the learned counsel for the 3 rd Respondent-VYAPAM.

(3.) The Petitioner/Appellant is an Anganbadi Worker. She was therefore eligible to be considered for appointment as Anganbadi Supervisor as against the quota earmarked for selection from among Anganbadi Workers. She applied for it, also claiming that she belongs to a Scheduled Caste. However, when she appeared for the competitive examination conducted by the 3rd Respondent-VYAPAM, she wrongly marked her identity as one belonging to Scheduled Tribe, by so bubbling on the OMR answer sheet. VYAPAM, the selecting authority prepared a list by including the Petitioner in the general merit list and also in the Scheduled Tribe list. This exercise was sometime in 2014. The Petitioner filed the writ petition challenging her inclusion in the Scheduled Tribe list and pleaded that she may be included in the Scheduled Caste list, obviously because she could not find a reasonably high position in the general merit list. She had not obtained any interlocutory order in the course of the writ petition, either to reserve a vacancy or to make any appointment provisional and subject to the result of the writ petition. She had also not impleaded any person who was among the scheduled caste candidates who stood appointed by that time. We say this because by 2014, all appointments were actually made on the basis of impugned selection list. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition upholding the plea of VYAPAM and the State that erroneous bubbling in the OMR sheet cannot be visited in writ jurisdiction. Hence this appeal.