CHANDRA CHOURE Vs. PROJECT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the order dated 11-3-2008 passed by the Collector Betul in appeal and order dated 27-3-2010 (Annx.P/4) passed by the Commissioner Narmadapuram Division, Hoshangabad, making allegation that rightful appointment of petitioner was interfered with and to favour respondent No. 2 such orders were passed. It is the case of the petitioner that applications were submitted for appointment on the post of Anganwadi Worker in Ratanpur Gram Panchayat, Neemdhana. The petitioner was selected accordingly and an order of appointment was issued on 28-11-2007 by the respondent No. 1. The charge was taken over by the petitioner on 5-12-2007. An appeal was preferred by the respondent No. 2 against the appointment of the petitioner before the Collector Betul and in the said appeal, the order was passed on 11-3-2008. The Collector held that there was calculation mistake committed in calculating the marks of the respondent No. 2 and, if, the rightful calculation would have been done, the respondent No. 2 would have been at Serial No. 1 of the merit list and the petitioner would not have been appointed. Therefore, the order of appointment of the petitioner was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the respondent No. 1 with a direction to issue the order of appointment in favour of respondent No. 2. It is further contended that the petitioner preferred a revision against the said order before the Commissioner. The said revision was also decided in the same manner and the order of the Collector was upheld, therefore, she was required to file the present writ petition.

(2.) While entertaining this writ petition, interim orders were issued on 6-8- 2010 and the operation of the impugned orders were stayed as a result, the petitioner remained in the employment. However, there was a direction to produce the original record and on an application moved by the respondent No. 2, the matter was heard at length and the interim order of stay was vacated on 6-9-2010. In terms of the orders issued by this Court, Smt. Vandana Tiwari, the Project Officer Integrated Child Development Project, Bheempur, appeared before this Court, produced the original records which have been returned after perusal and a photocopy of the same is retained in the records. It is the case of the respondents that the instructions were subsequently issued and the Scheme made by the State Government was duly modified vide order dated 27-7-2007. It is categorically stated that by an amendment made in the Scheme, it was provided that the minimum educational qualification for appointment as Anganwadi Worker in the rural tribal area would be passing of 8th Class, but in the other places it should be 10th or 12th Class and only if such candidates are not available, then a candidate having 8th Class education may be considered. It is the case of the respondents that this particular aspect has been mentioned in the Scheme which was in vogue at the time when the appointment was made. Thus, in fact, the calculation of merit was to be done on the basis of marks obtained in the Higher Secondary and not on the basis of 8th Class examination. The instructions were issued by the appellate and revisional authority and, therefore, proper assessment was done, marks were calculated and it was found that in fact the respondent No. 2 was more meritorious than the petitioner. Accordingly, after making proper selection, since the petitioner is at Serial No. 2 of the list and the respondent No. 2 is at Serial No. 1, she has rightly been given an order of appointment on 31-7-2010. It is contended that enquiry with respect to the marks obtained was duly done. The experience certificate of the respondent No. 2 was got verified and then only the orders were passed. The respondent No. 2 has given her joining pursuance to the order after vacating the interim stay by this Court and she is working at present as Anganwadi Worker.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the record minutely.