KALADI PADMA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Helper vide Rc No.51/A/2012, dtd. 4/3/2013 for the Gogullanka Anganwadi Center Code No.264 as Anganwadi Helper and since then she is discharging her duties with utmost satisfaction of the higher authorities and she is having experience more than 9 years and is eligible for the promotion of Anganwadi Worker as per Rules in vogue, therefore, she made representations to the respondent authorities to consider her name for promotion of Anganwadi Worker. Even though 5th respondent has issued Notification dtd. 26/8/2022, the Anganwadi Center Code No.264 was not notified showing the vacancy position, however, on the strength of the file, the respondents are going to consider, the Anganwadi Helper who has been working in the Code No.265 for promotion as Anganwadi Worker, though according to Notification Condition No.(1)(a), only local candidates to be considered, contrary this Condition No.(1)(a) of the Notification, as Anganwadi Helper is not resident of the Anganwadi Center Code No.264. It is further stated that there is no notification was issued to fill up Promotion to the post of the Anganwadi Worker for the Gogulanka Anganwadi Center Code No.264, though, the respondents issued Notification dtd. 26/8/2022, in the said Notification, the Gogullanka Anganwadi Center Code no.264, is not notified, even then also, the respondent trying to take steps to effect promotion to the 6th respondent who is presently working as Anganwadi Helper in the Byravalanka Anganwadi Center Code No.265 contrary to the Memo No.5771/K3/2006, dtd. 5/1/2012. It is further stated that as per G.O.Rt.No.102, dtd. 28/3/2011, wherein it was mandated that, after careful consideration of the proposal submitted by the Commissioner Women Development & Child Welfare, Hyderabad vide reference 4th read above, the Government enhanced the age limit to 45 years in respect of Anganwadi Helpers for appointment as Anganwadi Workers, provided she fulfils all other conditions and is physically fit to discharge the duties of anganwadi Workers including conduct of Pre-School and should have been regular in attending to her duties without any adverse reports. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Heard Mr. G.Simhadri, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-III and learned Government Pleader for women and Child Welfare appearing for the respondents.