N.PADMAKUMARI Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue to be resolved in these three writ petitions is the same, I deem it appropriate to dispose of them by this common order.

(2.) Heard Sri M. Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.Nos.5128 of 2020 and 17923 of 2021, Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.15701, and learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare appearing for the official respondents in all the writ petitions.

(3.) For convenience and to avoid ambiguity in the discussion, the facts in W.P.No.5128 of 2020 are considered. In a nutshell, the case of the petitioner is that she passed 10th class in the year 1999 and later, passed graduation in the year 2005. She applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker to the respondent authorities and the selection committee of the respondent authorities considered her application and appointed her as an Anganwadi Worker on 15/8/2012 to Matalabupeta Village, Sarubujjili Mandal, Srikakulam District, and since then she has been discharging her duties as such without any complaint or remarks. While so, the Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Sarubujji Mandal, Srikakulam District, 5 th respondent herein, issued proceedings dtd. 10/2/2020 terminating the petitioner from the services of the Anganwadi Worker. The same is under challenge in W.P.No.5128 of 2020.