N VIJAYALAKSHMI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ appeal is filed against the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.3236 of 2011, dated 03.11.2011, wherein the writ appellant, as writ petitioner, sought for quashing of the proceedings relating to the appointment of the 4th respondent as an Anganwadi Organizer in the Child Centre at Koovanuthupudur in Dindigul District. THE order appointing the 4th respondent was made on 23.02.2011.

(2.) THE appellant's contention is that the 4th respondent does not come within the distance zone as given in G.O.Ms.No.237, Social Welfare (Noon-Meal) Department, dated 18.08.1997, to qualify for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Organizer and that the said respondent resides in another village. It is stated that the appellant had completed her +2 Course and presently doing B.B.A. Degree in Madurai Kamaraj University. In the circumstances, the appellant contended that she is better qualified than the 4th respondent. Learned Single Judge pointed out paragraph No.6 of the counter affidavit, dated 20.06.2011, which stated that Koovanuthu village consists of 9 villages namely, Koovanuthu Pudur, Notchiodaipatti, Kurumbapatti, Kulakkaranpatti, Kavarayapatti, Muthandikottam, Sattakkaranpatti, Anthonimuthu Kottam and Kottaipudur and based on the interview conducted for four persons, including the appellant, the Selection Committee selected the 4th respondent as her performance in the interview was found to be satisfactory. Learned Single Judge also pointed out the residence of the appellant per se cannot be treated as a circumstance which would give priority to the appellant to score over the 4th respondent.

(3.) THIS Court, in a similar appeal in W.A.(MD) No.28 of 2012, disposed on 07.03.2012, rejected such a contention raised by the appellant therein, who was unsuccessful before the writ court. We do not think that reliance of G.O.Ms.No.237, Social Welfare (Noon-Meal) Department, dated 18.08.1997, and G.O.Ms.No.303, Social Welfare, Noon Meal and Project Department, dated 19.08.2005, would be of any assistance to the appellant herein, since distance is only one of the persuasive aspects in the matter of selection of Anganwadi Worker.