SUNEETA KUMARI & ORS Vs. STATE & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Through the present writ petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:-

(3.) Petitioner No.1-Suneeta Kumari claims that she was temporarily appointed as Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Centre at Drubeel Proper purely on monthly honorarium basis as admissible under norms by the Child Development Project Officer, (I.C.D.S.) Inderwal vide order dated 07.08.2013 (Annexure-A at page 7), similarly petitioner No.2-Sahira Banoo claims that she was temporarily appointed as Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Centre at Gagrimarh purely on monthly honorarium basis as admissible under norms by the Child Development Project Officer, (I.C.D.S.) Inderwal vide order dated 17.12.2013 (Annexure-A at page 8) and Petitioner No.3-Heena Banoo also claims that she was appointed as Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Centre at Rahal Panchayat Inderwal-B purely on temporarily basis till the post is advertised and selection is made by the competent authority on monthly honorarium basis as admissible under norms by the Child Development Project Officer, (I.C.D.S.) Inderwal vide order dated 07.08.2013 (Annexure-A at page 9).