SANJUKTA DEVI Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Opposite party no.6 in W.P.(C) No. 20754 of 2010 has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 7.3.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in the said W.P.(C) and for quashing of the order dated 19.10.2010 passed by the Sub-Collector, Cuttack, respondent no.2 in the Writ Appeal selecting respondent No.5-Ranjulata Mallik as Anganwadi Worker in respect of Mundasahi Addl. Anganwadi Centre under Mahanga Block in the district of Cuttack and seeking a further direction to respondent nos. 1 to 4 to proceed with the selection process considering the candidature of the appellant vis-a-vis respondent no.5 along with other eligible candidates.

(2.) Pursuant to an advertisement bearing Notification No. 1328 dated 05.12.2009 issued by respondent no.4-C.D.P.O., Mahanga for selection of Anganwadi Worker in respect of Sl.No.43 of the advertisement, which related to Mundasahi Additional Anganwadi Centre, Mundasahi under Kuhunda Gram Panchayat of Mahanga Block in the district of Cuttack, the appellant had applied for selection along with others candidates. The said Mundasahi Additional Anganwadi Centre has been created taking some area of Hansadia and Kuhunda-1 Anganwadi centre, which is within the Kuhunda Gram Panchayat. As it appears, seventeen candidates had applied for the said post including the appellant out of whom, candidature of three candidates remained valid and that of fourteen candidates were rejected on scrutiny. From among three candidates, the appellant was selected by the Selection Committee placing her at Sl.No.1 and she joined the post.

(3.) It is stated in this Writ Appeal that the candidature of respondent no.5 was rejected on the ground that she had not filed copy of the order of the learned Family Judge to prove that she was a divorcee vide notification dated 15.12.2009. Respondent No.5 filed a representation before the C.D.P.O., Mahanga on 21.12.2009 in support of her claim that she belonged to Schedule Caste category and had furnished all the required documents, but the same were not considered.