CHANDRA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR RAMANATHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appointment of the fourth respondent as Anganwadi Worker is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner states that the writ petitioner is fully qualified for appointment to the post of Anganwadi worker. The writ petitioner is a native of same village and she was participated in the process of selection. Without considering the comparative merits of the writ petitioner, the fourth respondent was appointed as Anganwadi worker on extraneous consideration. Thus, the writ petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition. The writ petitioner narrated the merits of her case and contended that the authorities competent had not considered her case at the time of conducting process of selection.

(3.) The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 disputed the contentions of the writ petitioner by stating that the authorities competent considered all the factors as well as the guidelines issued by the Governments in the matter of selection for appointment to the post of Anganwadi worker. In this regard, the counter filed by the third respondent states as follows:-