SMT. SEEMA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT was declared that an Anganbari worker may be appointed at Tok Gahatiya Dewari, and that, any person, who is a resident of that area, may seek to be engaged as such Anganbari worker. Appellant and private respondent offered themselves to be engaged as such Anganbari worker. Private respondent was selected and thereupon, engaged. At this stage, appellant contended that the Scheduled Caste population in that area is more than majority and, accordingly, in terms of Government 's directions, only a Scheduled Caste candidate could be engaged as such Anganbari worker.

(2.) THIS issue was taken up by the appellant before the appellate authority. The appellate authority found, as a fact, that the Scheduled Caste population in that area is more than majority and, accordingly, only a Scheduled Caste candidate could be appointed as Anganbari worker for that area. While concluding thus, appellate authority directed appointment of the appellant on the ground that she is a member of Scheduled Caste community. The appellate authority totally failed to take note of the fact that no search was made to find the best candidate, belonging to Scheduled Caste community, for being engaged as Anganbari worker, for an area where only a Scheduled Caste candidate could be so appointed. This was highlighted by the private respondent by filing a writ petition and the said contention has been accepted by the Hon 'ble Judge by the judgment and order under appeal.

(3.) WITH the observation as above, we dispose of the appeal.