PREETIBEN RAMNIKLAL TRIVEDI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner for following reliefs:-

(2.) Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner candidly has drawn attention of this Court to an order dtd. 7/7/2022 in Special Civil Application No.9589 of 2017 and allied matter to submit that the issue is more or less covered in the aforesaid order. However, only factual verification which will have to be ascertained is the date on which the nomination process for Anganwadi workers to be promoted to Mukhya Sevaika has taken place by the respondent-municipal corporation as that would be the date relevant for the purpose of considering the claim of the petitioner. It is submitted that if on the date of such nomination, the petitioner has not crossed age of 45/48 years, ruling Special Civil Application No.9589 of 2017 will squarely cover. However, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that on record there is nothing to suggest the process of nomination undertaken by the respondent municipal corporation.

(3.) As against this, learned advocate appearing for the respondent corporation has drawn attention of this Court to the documents to indicate that birth date of the petitioner is 27/11/1967 and the affidavit filed on behalf of the municipal corporation in the year 2019 has indicated that the nomination to the cadre of Mukhya Sevika has not taken place in so far as the petitioner is concerned. It is observed that the ICDS, Urban-1 had undertaken the process of preparing the provisional seniority list as on 1/7/2017 of all the Anganwadi workers apparently for the purpose of promotion to Mukhya Sevika and considering the date of birth of the petitioner, as referred hereinabove on the date of 1/7/2017, the petitioner would have crossed age of 50 years.