PRAVATI PANDA Vs. THE COLLECTOR, RAYAGADA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The submission made on behalf of the petitioner that in terms of order dated 18.10.2005, the petitioner has made an application for being considering as Anganwadi Worker. The contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the advertisement dated 18.10.2005 has been issued. On the basis of guideline, in which the petitioner has deemed to be fit to be engaged as Anganwadi Worker and accordingly the name of the petitioner for her engagement has been decided but in the meanwhile a new guideline has been implemented by the authority.

(3.) The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that since the selection process has been initiated on the basis of the guideline in which he has been declared successful but due to some procedural delay the appointment has not been made. In the meantime, new guideline has come and accordingly, the petitioner has not been engaged on the ground that the selection has to be made on the basis of new guideline. The petitioner in Annexure-7 by which the procedure of engagement has not been acted upon on the ground of affidavit of a new guideline which is under challenge on the ground of once the selection process has been started on the basis of a guideline and in the course of the selection process new guideline has come, the new guideline will not govern the selection process which has already been started.