NASEEMA BANO Vs. STATE OF J&K & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents in the year 2005 invited applications for engagement as Anganwadi Workers for different Anganwadi Centers of Kashmir Province including Anganwadi Center Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla, Kupwara. The appellant responded to the notice and submitted an application for her engagement as Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Center Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla -- one of the Anganwadi Centers under ICDS Project Kupwra. The respondents vide order No.CDPOK/ICDS/Estt/06/115-118 dated 15.05.2006, engaged the appellant as Anganwadi Worker for the said Anganwadi center. The respondent No.6, after the aforesaid engagement, threw challenge to the engagement of the appellant, complaining that the appellant though previously a resident of Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla, Kupwara, had married at Kachri Langate and therefore, was not entitled to her engagement as Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Center Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla. The respondents, on verification of the complaint received from respondent No.6, found substance in the complaint and concluded that the appellant had married at village Kachri Langate and thus did not belong to Panchayat Halqa, in which the Anganwadi Center in question was located. The respondents cancelled order of engagement of appellant and in her place engaged respondent No.6, vide order dated 12.9.2006 as Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Center Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla, engaged.

(2.) The appellant approached this Court with a writ petition, pleading, inter-alia, that the appellant was engaged as Anganwadi Worker on the strength of her merit; that the appellant was unmarried on the date of advertisement notice and figured at the top of the select list published in 30th January 2006 Issue of Daily "Tameel-i-Ir-shad"; that the respondents issued formal engagement order in favour of the appellant on 15th of May 2006. Immediately whereafter engagement order was kept in abeyance vide Order No.CDPOK/ICDS/Estt/509-10 dated 18th May 2006; that the respondents thereafter proceeded to cancel engagement order in favour of the appellant vide order No.POK/ICDS/Estt/06/1072-73 dated 12.9.2006 and later vide order No.CDPOK/ICDS/Estt/06/ 954-58 dated 30.9.2006, engaged respondent No.6 against the vacancy. The appellant complained that her order was cancelled and respondent No.6 engaged notwithstanding the order of this Court in SWP No.1393/2006, wherein the appellant had questioned the order dated 18th May 2006, placing appellant's engagement order in abeyance. The appellant complained that the respondents held inquiry into complaint filed by respondent No.6 in ex parte , at the back of appellant and that the appellant was neither heard nor allowed to project her case. The appellant even disputed that any inquiry was ever conducted by the respondents to conclude that the appellant was not resident of Panchayat Halqa concerned at the time of her engagement as Anganwadi Worker. The appellant insisted that on the date of advertisement notice, the appellant was eligible in all respects for the advertised post and that her marriage, after her application was received, would not render her ineligible for engagement for the advertised post. The appellant pleaded that even after her marriage the appellant has been residing as Khana Nisheen Daughter -- village Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla and that the appellant had even inherited property from her father. The order dated 12.9.2006 is assailed as violative of Articles 14 and 311 of Constitution of India.

(3.) The respondents resisted the writ petition on the grounds that the respondent No.6, also an aspirant for the post of Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Center Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla, objected to the engagement of appellant on the ground that the appellant was not residing at Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla and that the complaint filed by the respondent No.6 on scrutiny was found to be true and correct. It is pleaded that the respondents conducted an inquiry in the matter and even made spot verification, which revealed that the appellant was married to one Shri Ghulam Mohi-ud-din of Kachri Langate in September 2003 and that said Ghulam Mohi-ud-din had been employed as Rehbar-e-Taleem Teacher in a School at Kachri Langate for last two years. The inquiry, according to the respondents, also revealed that the appellant's husband was residing with his parents at Village Kachri Langate. The respondents claimed the inquiry held by the respondents, to have lead to conclusion that the appellant was not resident of village Zamindar Mohalla, Drugmulla, Kupwara, her engagement as Anganwadi Worker was cancelled and in her place respondent No.6 engaged. The respondents insisted that in terms of engagement order dated 15th May 2006, the engagement order was liable to be cancelled/ terminated in the event the candidate was found to have shifted to a place other than the place in the Panchayat Malqa/Mohalla/Patli/village Anganwadi Center for which she has been selected, was located.