GUNJA SAXENA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REGARD being had to the similar controversy involved in the above two cases, they have been heard analogously together with the consent of the parties and a common order is being passed in the matter. Facts of Writ Petition No.10161 of 2012 are narrated as under: -

(2.) THE petitioner before this court has filed this present petition claiming appointment to the post of 'Aganwadi Worker'. An advertisement was issued inviting applications for the post of 'Aganwadi Worker' and the petitioner was placed at Sr. No.1 of the merit list and one Ku Priyanka Namdev was placed at Sr. No.2 of the list. Appointment order was issued on 20 -03 -2010, against which the appeal was preferred by Ku Priyanka Namdev. The appeal was allowed by the learned Collector by setting aside the appointment of the petitioner and an appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the Commissioner. While the appeal was pending before the Commissioner, the respondent therein Ku Priyanka Namdev has informed the Commissioner that she is not interested in working on the post of 'Aganwadi Worker as she has been appointed somewhere else on the post of Assistant Grade -III and the Commissioner vide order dated 16 -03 -2011 has directed the Project Officer, Women and Child Development Rajgarh to pass an appropriate order, keeping in view the merit list prepared for the post of 'Aganwadi Worker'. The petitioner's grievance is that the Project Officer has not obeyed the order passed by the Commissioner and, therefore, an appropriate order or direction be issued directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Aganawadi Worker.

(3.) REPLY has been filed on behalf of the State Government and the stand of the State Government is that they have issued a fresh advertisement Annexure -R -1 dated 15 -06 -2010 and in light of the fresh advertisement dated 29 -02 -2012 they shall be filling up the post in question and therefore the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.