SUVARNA NETAJI PATIL Vs. SMITA ASHOK PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has filed this Appeal challenging the Decree dtd. 8/2/2023 passed by the District Judge-5, Sangli dismissing Regular Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2021 and confirming the Decree dtd. 22/12/2020 passed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Sangli in Regular Civil Suit No. 506 of 2013. By that Decree, the Trial Court held that the appointment of Appellant (Defenant No.3) as 'Anganwadi Sevika' is illegal and has directed Defendant Nos.1 and 2 to appoint Plaintiff as 'Angandwadi Sevika'.

(2.) The dispute between Appellant/Defendant No.3 and Respondent/ Plaintiff is about their competing claims for appointment on the post of 'Anganwadi Sevika' for Village-Jaygavan, Taluka Kavathe-Mahankal, District-Sangli. An advertisement was issued for filling up various posts of Anganvadi Sevika, Anganwadi Madatnis and Mini-Anganvadi Sevika, which included 34 posts of Angadwadi Sevika for various villages, including the Village-Jaygavan. The advertisement prescribed the age limit of minimum 25 years and maximum 35 years as on 21/1/2011. Minimum educational qualification of Matriculation was prescribed for the post of Anganwadi Sevika. Both Plaintiff as well as Defendant No.3/Appellant applied in pursuance of the advertisement. According to the Plaintiff, list of eligible and non-eligible candidates was published, which reflected remark 'ineligible' against Appellant's name. Plaintiff claims that Defendant No. 3 was age barred on 21/1/2011 as she relied upon School Leaving Certificate which reflected her date of birth as '2/6/1975'. However, Defendant No.3 also relied upon Certificate of Birth issued by the Additional District Registrar of Births and Deaths and Block Development Officer certifying her birth date as '2/2/1976'. On the basis of Certificate of Birth issued by Block Development Officer, Defendant No. 3 was allowed to participate in the selection process and was appointed as 'Anganwadi Sevika' on 28/3/2011.

(3.) Plaintiff therefore instituted Regular Civil Suit No.506/2013 before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Sangli challenging the appointment of Defendant No.3 and seeking her own appointment on the post of 'Anganwadi Sevika'. The Trial Court proceeded to decree the suit on 22/12/2020 and declared that the appointment of Defendant No.3 as 'Anganwadi Sevika' w.e.f. 28/3/2011 was illegal. Defendant Nos.1 and 2 were directed to appoint Plaintiff as 'Anganwadi Sevika' within two months. Plaintiff's prayer for permanent injunction and compensation was rejected.