Disposed

S.Nagamani, Kurnool Dist. v. Prl. Secy., Women Dev. and Child Welfare and 3 Ors.

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Aug 2024WP/34740/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, considered a writ petition challenging a recruitment notification for Anganwadi workers. Upon learning that the petitioner was already promoted to an Anganwadi worker post at a different center, the court held that no order was necessary and closed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed without any order as to costs.

S.Nagamani, Kurnool Dist. Vs Prl… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 34740 OF 2015

¶7

Between:

¶8

S.Nagamani, Kurnool Dist., W/o D.Venkateshwarlu Aged about 40 years, Occ:Anganwadi helper R/o H.No. 47-172, Budhavarpet,^{Kurnool,KurnoolDist.} ...Petitioner

¶9

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Women Development and child welfare. Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶10

The Director of Women and Child Welfare, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.

¶11

The President/District Collector Dist Level selection committee Kurnool Kurnool District.

¶12

The Convener/ Project Director, District Women and^ChildWelfare Development Kurnool, Kurnool District.

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the Notification published on 04.10.2015 issued by the respondent No.2 and 3 herein in conducting recruitment for the post of Anganwadi workers in Kurnool Urban Project, Kurnool district as being illegal arbitrary and violative of rights guaranteed under Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India^{andfurtherviolativeof} Memo NO.9207/ICDSA1/98 Dated 23.12.1998, Memo No 5771/KG/2006 dated 03.12.2010 and Memo No. 5771/K3/2006 dated 05.01.2012 issued

¶15

by the respondent No 1 and 2 herein and further declare that the writ petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Anganwadi^worker. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WVMP. NO: 2094 OF 2016) Between:

¶16

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal^{Secretary,Women} Development and child welfare. Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶17

The Director of Women and Child Welfare, Andhra^Pradesh, Hyderabad.

¶18

The President/District Collector Dist Level selection^{committeeKurnool,} Kurnool District.

¶19

The Convener/ Project Director, District Women and^ChildWelfare Development Kurnool, Kurnool District.

¶20

...Petitioners/Respondents

¶21

AND

¶22

S.Nagamani, Kurnool Dist., W/o D.Venkateshwarlu Aged^{about40years,Occ:} Anganwadi helper R/o H.No. 47-172, Budhavarpet, Kurnool,^KurnoolDist.

¶23

...Respondent/Petitioner

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,^{theHighCourtmaybe} pleased to vacate the status quo order passed dated^26.10.2015in WP.No.34740 of 2015 and dismiss the Writ Petition.

¶25

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 44644 OF 2015)

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,^{theHighCourtmaybe} pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance to the Advertisement published on 04.10.2015 issued by the^{respondentNo.3&4} herein for the posts of Anganwadi workers in Kurnool Urban Kurnool District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition.

¶27

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KRISHNA C M Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR WOMEN DEVELOPMENT

¶29

AND CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT

¶30

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶31

APHC010611822015

¶32

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶33

AT AMARAVATI

¶34

[3333]

¶35

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶36

FRIDAY THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST

¶37

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶38

PRESENT

¶39

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶40

WRIT PETITION NO: 34740/2015

¶41

Between:

¶42

S.nagamani, Kurnool Dist. ...PETITIONER

¶43

AND

¶44

PrI Secy Women Dev Child Welfare 3 Ors and ...RESPONDENT(S) Others

¶45

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶46

KRISHNA CM

¶47

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶48

1.GP FOR WOMEN DEV-CHILD WELFARE(AP)

¶49

The Court made the following:

¶50

¶51

ORDER:

¶52

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶53

India seeking the following relief:-

¶54

“. .to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly^oneinthe nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the Notification published on 04.10.2015 issued by the respondent No.2 and 3 herein in conducting recruitment for the post of Anganwadi workers in Kurnool Urban Project, Kurnool district as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of rights guaranteed under Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and further violative of Memo NO.9207/ICDSA1/98, Dated 23.12.1998, Memo NO.5771/KG/2006, dated 03.12.2010 and Memo No.5771/K3/2006, dated 05.01.2012 issued by the respondent No. 1 and 2 herein and further declare that the writ petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Anganwadi worker...”

¶55

The petitioner herein is working as anganwadi helper at Bhudavarpet, Kurnool Urban Project, Kurnool and was appointed vide proceedings dated 17.10.2007 of the 4*^^ respondent. The 1®* respondent has issued a memo dated 23.12.1998 stating that the anganwadi helpers shall be given preference in the selection of anganwadi workers, if they are eligible. While so, the 2^^ respondent issued proceedings dated 03.12.2010 directing the Project Directors to fill up the vacancies of anganwadi workers with eligible.anganwadi helpers. Subsequently, vide proceedings dated 05.01.2012, the 2^^^ respondent has held that only those candidates shall be selected for the post of anganwadi workers who belong to the same village where the anganwadi center is located. The petitioner submits thatⁱⁿ view of the aforesaid instructions, the petitioner is eligible to be promoted as anganwadi worker, but however, instead of considering the petitioner for promotion to the post of anganwadi worker, the respondents have issued the impugned notification dated 04.10.2015 inviting applications from the eligible women for recruiting anganwadi helpers and

¶56

¶57

anganwadi workers in 16 ICDS Project Main Kurnool District. Hence the present writ petition.is filed.

¶58

When the writ petition came up for admission on 26.10.2015, this Court has directed the parties to maintain status quo as on that day.

¶59

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child^Welfare.

¶60

Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader has produced a copy of letter addressed by the District Women and Child Welfare and Empowerment Officer,^Kurnool District dated 22.08.2024 wherein it is stated that the petitioner was initially appointed as anganwadi helper on 17.10.2007 at Budhavarapeta anganwadi center and has passed SSC. The petitioner has submitted a representation to the CDPO, ICDS Project, Kurnool requesting to promote her to the post of anganwadi worker; subsequent to which, the 2'^'^ respondent vide memo dated 05.01.2012 has issued instructions that if the post of anganwadi worker is vacantⁱⁿ the same village where anganwadi helper is qualified, the said anganwadi helper may be considered to be appointed as anganwadi worker if she has fulfilled the conditions laid down. But, the CDPO, ICDS project, Kurnool has recommended the petitioner for the post of anganwadi^workerat SR Nagar, to which she is not eligible.

¶61

It is further stated in the aforesaid copy of instructions^that upon petitioner’s request, she was transferred to Joharapuram anganwadi center as anganwadi helper vide proceedings dated 20.06.2018. Subsequently, the request of the petitioner has been considered and the petitioner was promoted as anganwai worker, Joharapuram with the approval of the District Collector, Kurnool vide

¶62

¶63

proceedings dated 20.06.2018 and is being continued^{inthesaidpost} till date.

¶64

In view of the fact that the petitioner’s case was^considered and was promoted to the post of anganwadi worker at^Joharapuram anganwadi center vide proceedings dated 20.06.2018 of the District Collector, Kurnool, this Court is of the opinion that^no further orders would be necessary in the present writ petition and^{thesameisliableto} be closed.

¶65

Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. There shall^beno order as to costs.

¶66

Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶67

Sd/- K.J. RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

One CC to Sri Krishna C. M, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Women Development and Child Welfare, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶72

Three CD Copies

¶73

¶74

¶75

HIGH COURT DATED;23/08/2024

¶76

ORDER WP.No.34740 of 2015

¶77

/a: 2 5FEB2C7) |
^ Current Section ^

¶78

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS

S.Nagamani, Kurnool Dist. v. Prl. Secy., Women Dev. and Child Welfare and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Nagamani, Kurnool Dist. v. Prl. Secy., Women Dev. and Child Welfare and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Chief Engineer (Projects) Srisailam Project, Vs Y. Jammulaiah

Marada Shankar Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal

M.R.K.Rao, Vs The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C

D.Srinivas Rao Vs Union of India, Rep by Its Prl.Secretary and 2 Others

k.srinivasa rao Vs the M.D.,Ap State Housing Corpn.Ltd and 4 Others

D.Saibaba, E.G. Dist and 2 Others Vs Prl Secy, Revenue (Endowments) Dept., Hyd and 2 Ot