BINODINI BARAD Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above noted writ petitions, having been filed challenging selection and engagement of Anganwadi Worker in respect of Barangagadia- II Anganwadi Centre of Champapedi G.P. under Ranpur ICDS Project of Dist- Nayagarh, were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) For better appreciation, the factual matrix of W.P.(C) No. 7772 of 2016 is referred to and taken into consideration. Pursuant to notification dated 21.12.2010 issued by the C.D.P.O., Ranpur for engagement of Anganwadi Worker in respect of Barangagadia-II Anganwadi Centre of Champapedi G.P. under Ranpur ICDS Project of Dist- Nayagarh, the petitioners, namely, Binodini Barad and Netramani Routray along with others, submitted their candidature in the prescribed format with all testimonial. The selection committee constituted under the chairmanship of the Sub-Collector, Nayagarh in its meeting held on 18.05.2011 drew a select list, in which Mamata Jena, having secured 63.73% of marks, stood first position; Binodini Barad, having secured 63.06% of marks, stood 2nd position; and Netramani Routray, having secured 60.87 % of marks, stood 3rd position. Challenging the said selection of Mamata Jena, Netramani Routray preferred Anganwadi Appeal No. 16 of 2011 before the Addl. District Magistrate, Nayagarh, who, vide order dated 21.02.2012, allowed the appeal and directed to prepare a fresh merit list for Barangagadia-II Anganwadi Centre. Challenging the order dated 21.02.2012 passed in Anganwadi Appeal No. 16 of 2011, Mamata Jena preferred W.P.(C) No. 5366 of 2012 and this Court, vide order dated 09.03.2015, dismissed the writ petition and vacated the interim order passed on 09.02.2015 relying upon the report furnished by the District Medical Board, Nayagarh. Consequence thereof, as per direction given by the Addl. District Magistrate, Nayagarh, a fresh merit list was prepared by the selection committee on 04.07.2015 placing Netramani Routray at serial no.1, having secured 65.28 % of marks, Binodini Barad at serial no.2, having secured 63.05% of marks, and Mamata Jena at serial no.3 having secured 58.73% of marks.

(3.) Mr. S. Mohaty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-Binodini Barad contended that the selection of Netramani Routray was done without taking into consideration the clarification issued by the Government, vide letter dated 10.05.2012, wherein it was specifically indicated that extra optional subject shall not be taken into account for calculation of percentage of marks in the matriculation examination of a candidate at the time of selection of Anganwadi Worker. If the said guideline is adhered to, then Netramani Routray could not have been selected and placed at serial no. 1 by the selection committee. It is further contended that as per the guidelines issued by the Government, preference should be given to a physically challenged candidate. The same has not been adhered to, even though Binodini Barad is a physically challenged candidate and, therefore, she approached the State Commissioner for Persons with Disability, who, on consideration of her application, passed an order on 15.09.2015 setting aside the selection of Netramani Routray and directed for selection of Binodini Barad taking into consideration her physical disability. Thereby, she seeks for quashing of order dated 23.04.2016 passed by the CDPO, Ranput in Annexure-11, by which Netramani Routray was allowed to continue by virtue of the interim order dated 05.11.2015 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 19582 of 2015. To substantiate his contention he has relied upon the judgment of the apex Court in Geetaben Ratilal Patel v. District Primary Education Officer , 2013 7 SCC 182.