HEMA DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTTARAKHAND & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, learned counsel for the appellant in Special Appeal No.1002 of 2018, Mr. D.K. Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner and the appellant in Special Appeal No.994 of 2018, and Mr. Anil K. Bisht, learned Standing Counsel for the State. Parties, in these two appeals, shall hereinafter be referred to as they are arrayed in the Writ Petition. These two appeals are preferred one by the writ petitioner, and the other by the sixth respondent in the writ petition, aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S/S) No.1020 of 2016 dated 13.11.2018.

(2.) Facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the third respondent issued an advertisement on 16.10.2014 inviting applications from eligible candidates for being considered to be appointed to the post of Anganbadi Worker/Anganbadi Karyakarti in the vacancies available at different villages/wards of different blocks of District Bageshwar.

(3.) The advertisement dated 16.10.2014, whereby applications were invited, among others, for the Anganbadi centre at Baisni-II, required that the applicant should fall the Below Poverty Line (hereinafter referred to as "BPL"). The application required the applicant to furnish details of the BPL card as proof of her falling below the poverty line. The appellant (the sixth respondent in the Writ Petition) left the column in the application form, regarding the BPL ID Number, blank. She was, however, selected both on the ground that she fulfilled the eligibility criteria, and that she had secured more marks than the respondent-writ petitioner.