MANISHA DEVI Vs. REKHA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 21/11/2013 passed by the Additional District Judge, Rajgarh, District Alwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate Court') in civil regular appeal No. 17/13 whereby, the appellate Court allowed the appeal filed by the defendant -respondents and set aside the Judgment and decree dated 06/02/2013 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 3, Alwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court') in civil suit No. 34/69/2011.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated facts are that the plaintiff -appellant filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction wherein it is stated that the plaintiff -appellant is a graduate and having two years teaching experience and three months survey experience. On the other hand the defendant -respondent No. 1 has passed only secondary class. In spite of that the defendant -respondent Nos. 2 to 6 wrongly selected defendant -respondent No. 1. According to the circular dated 15/09/2003 of the State Government, the candidate who was having higher education should have been granted preference. But ignoring the aforesaid circular a wrongly resolution was passed in the general meeting of Gram Panchayat Alai on 13/03/2010 and in pursuance to the said resolution the defendant -respondent No. 6 was granted appointment on the post of Aanganbari worker on 14/06/2010 which is per se illegal. It is further pleaded that the plaintiff -appellant submitted her application for the Aanganbari worker as per the circular dated 29/11/2006, before the Gram Panchayat Alai. In the resolution dated 03/12/2006 her name was mentioned at serial No. 2. But the defendant Nos. 2 to 5 ignoring the higher qualification of the plaintiff -appellant had passed resolution in favour of the defendant -respondent No. 1 against which the plaintiff -appellant submitted objections before the defendant -respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 6. Vide order dated 03/12/2006 while cancelling the selection process of the defendant -respondent No. 1 directed to proceed further as per the rules. But the Gram Panchayat again by violating the rules selected defendant -respondent No. 1.

(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit on 06/02/2013 by which while quashing and setting aside the order dated 14/06/2010, the defendant -respondent No. 3 was directed to grant appointment to the plaintiff -appellant on the post of Aanganbari worker in the village Narayanpur. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 06/02/2013 the defendant -respondent No. 1 preferred an appeal before the appellate Court and the learned appellant Court while allowing the appeal quashed and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court on 21/11/2013. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the appellate Court, the plaintiff -appellant preferred this second appeal.