BIDYUT MANJARI SETHI Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, by way of this writ petition, seeks to quash order dated 04.06.2016 at Annexure-15 passed by the Sub-Collector, Puri in AWW Misc. Appeal Case No. 88/2010 and declare that she is entitled to be appointed as Anganwadi Worker in respect of Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre, as she belonged to ward no. 15 and had secured highest marks, with all consequential benefits.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, in hand, is that the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Project, Kanas issued an advertisement on 26.03.2010 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for filling up of the post of Anganwadi Worker in additional Anganwadi Centre, namely, Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre of ward no. 15 comprising from house of Antaryami Parida to house of Bhagirathi Parida, along with other Anganwadi Centers of Badal Grama Panchayat. Pursuant thereto, for Alipada-2 Anganwadi Center, the petitioner and opposite party no.7- Sima Sahoo applied. The list of eligible candidates was published on 16.04.2010 in Annexure-2 inviting objections. The list so prepared was made final, as no objection was received. Pursuant to such eligibility list prepared by the authority in Annexure-2 dated 16.04.2010, opposite party no.7 was selected.

(3.) Dr. J.K. Lenka, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner belonged to ward no. 15 of Alipada village and her serial number is 255 and house number is 79, whereas opposite party no.7 married to one Prasanta Kumar Balilyar Singh, who belonged to ward no. 14 having house no. 24 and serial no. 127. Since petitioner belonged to ward no. 15, she is eligible to be considered for Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre, as because her house exists within the operational area. He further contended that when the petitioner preferred an appeal challenging the selection of opposite party no.7 in AWW Misc. Appeal No. 88 of 2010 before the Sub-Collector, Puri, the CDPO submitted a report on 26.07.2013, enclosing the joint enquiry report prepared by the Tahasildar, Kanas and BDO, Kanas on 01.03.2014, stating therein that opposite party no.7 belonged to the service area but the petitioner does not, and that though the petitioner secured highest mark than opposite party no.7, her candidature was rejected due to the fact that she is an outsider, and that since opposite party no.7 is the only candidate to be selected for the Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre, she was selected by the authority. Such report is contrary to the advertisement issued by the CDPO, which indicates that Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre is in ward no. 15, which comprises from the house of Antaryami Parida to that of Bhagirathi Parida. Therefore, on the basis of such report, when the Sub-Collector, Puri decided AWW Misc. Appeal No. 88 of 2010, vide order dated 16.09.2014, the same was challenged before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 19469 of 2014, which was disposed of directing the District Social Welfare, Puri to submit a fresh report by causing a spot enquiry relating to residential status of the petitioner vis- -vis opposite party no.7. Accordingly a report was submitted by the District Social Welfare, Puri stating that house of the petitioner does not come under service area of Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre and on the other hand the house of opposite party no.7 comes under Ward No. 14. Hence, the houses of both the candidates are not coming under the jurisdiction of service area of Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre i.e. ward no. 15 as per the notification for engagement of Anganwadi Worker. It is contended that such report of the District Welfare Officer is contrary to the advertisement. On spot verification it is found that as per AWW engagement notification and BLCC proceedings the service area of Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre comprises from "House of Antaryami Parida to house of Bhagirathi Parida of Ward No. 15", but it is not categorically mentioned with regard to father's name of the candidates. As per the BLCC proceeding and notification for engagement of Anganwadi Worker in Alipada-2 Anganwadi Centre, Sri Antaryami Parida, S/o Hata Parida and Bhagirathi Parida, S/o Antaryami Parida belonged to one family of ward no. 15, and another Bhagirathi Parida, S/o- Nimai Parida of village Alipada belonged to ward no. 14. Thereby, in respect of both the applicants, the finding of the SubCollector in the impugned order cannot sustain and is liable to be set aside.