Dismissed

Smt. Amrita Bai v. Smt. Aswani Bai

Chhattisgarh HC6 Oct 2024WPS/2985/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by Smt. Amrita Bai challenging the appointment of a rival candidate as an Anganbadi Worker. Court held that candidates lacked the mandatory Below Poverty Line certificate, dismissed the petition, and upheld the impugned order dismissing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Order dated 29.10.2008 and appeal dated 30.09.2007 Upheld. No order as to cost(s).

Smt. Amrita Bai Vs Smt. Aswani Bai — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

WPS No. 2985 of 2016

¶3

2024:CGHC:39736

¶4

Digitally ANKIT signed byANKITKUMAR KUMAR SINGH SINGH Date:2024.10.08 17:27:22 +0530

¶5

NAFR

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

WPS No. 2985 of 2016

¶8

Smt. Amrita Bai W/o Shri Shiv Kumar Satnami, aged about 38 years, R/o Village-Amlidih, Post-Bhalu Khondhra, Tahsil Lormi, District- Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

versus

¶11

Smt. Aswani Bai W/o Shri Chandra Prakash, R/o VillageAmlidih, Post-Bhalu Khondhra, Tahsil Lormi, DistrictMungeli, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

The Project Officer, Department Of Women And Child Welfare, Tahsil- Lormi, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh

¶13

The Chief Executive Officer, Janpat Panchayat, TahsilLormi, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh

¶14

Gram Panchayat, Navagaon, Through The Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Navagaon, Dhelka, Tahsil- Lormi, DistrictMungeli, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

The Collector, Mungeli, District-Mungeli, Chhattisgarh

¶16

The State of Chhattisgarh, through, the Directorate, Department of Panchayat, Mantralay, Raipur, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶17

... Respondents

¶18

For Petitioner :- Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 :- Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate. For State/Respondents :- Mr. Amit Buxy, Panel Lawyer No.2 to 6

¶19

¶20

WPS No. 2985 of 2016

¶21

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board

¶22

07/10/2024

¶23

The petitioner herein called in question the legality, validity and correctness of order dated 29.10.2008 passed by the Director Panchayat, Raipur by which the revision filed by respondent No.1 has been allowed and the order of Additional Collector, Bilaspur, 28.06.2008 has been set aside.

¶24

In order to consider the plea of the petitioner, it would be appropriate to notice the following facts:-

¶25

2(i). Petitioner herein namely Smt. Amrita Bai, respondent No.1 namely Smt. Aswani Bai and one Pushpamani had filed an application before the Gram Panchayat Navagaon, Thelka, Lormi, District Mungeli, for the post of Anganbadi Worker. After due verification and scrutinizing the forms of the candidates, on 30.09.2007, the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, appointed respondent No.1 on the post of anganbadi worker on the basis of her educational qualification holding that all 3 candidates do not have the certificate of Below Poverty Line (for short “BPL”) as per survey 1997-98. Against the order of Janpad Panchayat, the petitioner filed the appeal before the Additional

¶26

¶27

WPS No. 2985 of 2016

¶28

Collector, Bilaspur as per policy dated 27.05.1996, in which the learned Additional Collector has held that the petitioner being a member of Below Poverty Line, is entitled for the post of anganbadi worker and allowed the appeal of the petitioner by order dated 28.06.2008. The order of the Additional Collector was challenged by respondent No.1 herein before the Director Panchayat, and the Director Panchayat vide order dated 29.10.2008 set aside the order of the Additional Collector and restored the order of the Janpad Panchayat, Lormi, against which this petition has been preferred by the petitioner.

¶29

Mr. Keshav Dewangan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the Director, Panchayat, is absolutely unjustified in holding that the petitioner is not having the certificate of Below Poverty Line and restoring the order of Janpad Panchayat, therefore, the instant writ petition deserves to be allowed and orders dated 29.10.2008 & 30.09.2007 deserve to be quashed.

¶30

Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao and Mr. Amit Buxy, learned counsels for the respective respondents, support the order of the Director, Panchayat and submit that as per survey conducted in the year 1997-98, none of the candidates had

¶31

¶32

WPS No. 2985 of 2016

¶33

the certificate of Below Poverty Line, therefore, respondent No.1 herein being more educationally qualified, was appointed on the post of anganbadi worker and, as such, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶34

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records minutely.

¶35

Admittedly, applications were requisitioned for the appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker, Gram Panchayat, Navagon, Lormi, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, however, as per Annexure R-2/1, filed by respondent No.1 would show that in the meeting of Gram Panchayat it has clearly been recorded that all the three candidates do not have the certificate of Below Poverty Line as per survey 1997-98 and respondent No.1 herein, being more educationally qualified, was appointed on the post of angabadi worker which was upset by the Additional Collector vide order dated 28.06.2008. However, the order of the Additional Collector has been set aside by the impugned order dated 29.10.2008 passed by the Director, Panchayat, by recording following findings:-

¶36

¶37

WPS No. 2985 of 2016

¶38

“8- उभय पኘ� ᭎ के� व ि �ቛ�न ኋ अध ि ��ሹ�ओ ኋ ं� के� ्क ቚ रण े ेሰ� ्स ቚ त ् ु� त ु � स�थ े ሰ �ध ि �क ध ि �ध ि �त तक ु े के� पर ि रश ी #�न व ि कय�। े इसक े� ही# पर ि रय)जन� कय� े + �य � नय�य��य ् अपर क� े � कटर ् व ि /��सप � र स� ्� ቚ ्቎ अव ि भ� � के� पर ि रश ी #�न व ि कय�। े ቇ� ኋ पच � ा �यत न��ग ॉ 4� ठ � े क े � के� पद आध ि 7त ቇ� ኋ अ ेሰ �#ड#ह ी ेሰ� ऑग ॉ न/ड# ी क े �य + कत े � ु के� के� ध ि �ए ्� ቚ सभ# त#न� ु अभयध ् ि थ + य� के= य)गय�त ् � ु स ेሰ �न ही?। त#न� ु अभयथ@ ् क े ኘ� ᭎ आठ�A े उቈ#ण ኍ , सथ�न#य ् ह)न ी स� ेत ሰ द�त ु � ु सच C ा # ेሰ� न� , त#न) ु ही# अज� . �गॉ+ के= हीD। त#न ु ही# व ि नयव � ि ሹ के� स ेሰ य ्च ቚ ा ध ि �त/स�#क ् ेE त ु 97.98 स� ज#�न य�पन �� ्ቧ+ के= ग ॉ र#/#र � � न#च ा� करन े थ#। पर पर ि र��र के= सच C ा # ेሰ� सቜ ኌ H ेሰ ध ि �त नहA ी स ेሰ �न अह ी+ त� ु ह)न ी व ि नयव � ि ሹ के� ध ि �ए व ि नयव � ि ሹ कत े � ु + ओ ं� न� श ी? ኘव ᭎ ि णक य)गयत ् � ु के� ्� ቚ ्቎ 4क े � के) आ��र /न�य� ए�� क े ኘ� ᭎ आठ�A े ेሰ� अध ि �क ्� ቚ ्቎ � � क ��# प � नर#ኘणक ᭎ त े @ ु 7# ेሰ त# ु अቜ ኌ I�न# /�ई के= क े �य + कत े � ु के� पद पर व ि नयव � ि ሹ केर द#। अ�#नस ् त व ि �ቛ�न ኋ नय�य��य ् अपर क� े � कटर ् व ि /��सप � र न� अन�� व ि दक े � के� प � नर ि रኘण ᭎ आ� � दन के) इस आ��र पर स�#क ् े �र केर ध ि �य� विके अन�� व ि दक े � अ ेሰ र#त�/�ई ु के� सस � र कन े ह ् ी ई व ि पत� ु र� ेሰ स�य के� न� पर ग ॉ र#/# र � � ् ቚेሰ �ण प्ቔ व ि दन4क े 22.08.04 के) ज�र# व ि कय� े गय� ॉ ही? � /#.प# .ए� . र�श ी न क े �ड ी+ के= ्व ቚ ि तध ु ि �व ि प प � श के= गॉई ही?। इसस नय�य��य ् न� यही े ሰ �न� विके अन�� व ि दक े � अ ेሰ र#त� ु /�ई ग ॉ र#/# र � � स� न#च ा� ज#�न य�पन करन े � �� पर ि र��र के= ही? � प � नर#ኘणक ᭎ त े @ ु अቜ ኌ I�न#/�ई स � प पर ि र��र के= ही?। ज/व ि क यही सप ् ही) चक ा� े � ही? विके व ि नयव � ि ሹ के� स ेሰ य सभ# आ� � व ि दक े �ऐ ं� /#.प# .ए� . पर ि र��र के= नहA ी थ#। अथ� + त त#न� ु उH ेሰ #द��र� के� न� तत ु ् स ेሰ य ्च ቚ ा ध ि �त �्ቧ+ १९७.९८ के= स� ज#�न य�पन �� ग ॉ र#/#र � � न#च ा� करन े पर ि र��र� के= सच C ा # ेሰ� सቜ ኌ H ेሰ ध ि �त नहA ी थ�। व ि �ቛ�न ኋ नय�य��य ् अपर क� े � कटर ् व ि /��सप � र न� प � नर#ኘणक ᭎ त े @ ु अቜ ኌ I�न#/�ई च ा न ् क े �श के� पर ि र��र के� स � प पर ि र��र े ሰ �न� ही?। ज/व ि क अव ि भ� � के� अनस�र � आ� � व ि दक े � अन�� व ि दक े � द)न) के� पर ि र��र� के� प�स � � त#ह ु ी र भव C ही?। इस ्क ቚ े �र स ेሰ �न य)गयत ् �ऐ ु ं� ह)न ी के� क े �रण आ� � व ि दक े �ओ ं� ेሰ� स� क े ኘ� ᭎ आठ�A े के� ्� ቚ ्቎ � � क के� आ��र पर प � नर#ኘणक ᭎ त े � ु के=, के= गॉई व ि नयव � ि ሹ सह# ी ही?। उपर)ሹ ኋ आ��र� पर अपर �व ि ण + त क� े � कटर ् व ि /��सप � र के� ्क ቚ रण े ेሰ� प�र ि रत ु आद � श व ि दन4क 28 जन C 2008 व ि �ध ि �अन � क ेC � नहA ी प�य ज�न स� अप�सत ् व ि कय� े ज�कर े यही प � नर#ኘण ᭎ आ� � दन स�#क ् े �र व ि कय� े ज�त� ु

¶39

¶40

WPS No. 2985 of 2016

¶41

ही? � इस नय�य��य ् ቛ�र� ኋ ्क ቚ रण े ेሰ� प�र ि रत सथग ् ॉ न आद � श व ि दन4क े 08.07.08 " एतद ु ቛ�र� ኋ व ि नरसत ् व ि कय� े ज�त� ु ही?।

¶42

A careful perusal of paragraph 8 of the impugned order and the comparative assessment sheet filed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure R-2/1, would show that all the three candidates were not having the certificate of Below Poverty Line as per survey 1997-98, and even it is stated at the bar that in the petitioner’s application, it is not mentioned that she has having the certificate of Below Poverty Line on the basis of survey 1997-98. Annexure R-2/1 and the order of the Director Panchayat clearly state that the petitioner is not having the certificate of Below Poverty Line on the basis of survey 1997-98 and respondent No.1, having the more educational qualification, has given the appointment on the post of anganbadi worker. As such, the view taken by the Director Panchayat in the impugned order dated 29.10.2008 is in accordance with law and based on the material available on record and I do not find any merit in the instant writ petition, accordingly it deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost(s).

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

Sd/(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶45

Ankit

Smt. Amrita Bai v. Smt. Aswani Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Amrita Bai v. Smt. Aswani Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Shashikanta Bharadwaj Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Kaleshwar Ram Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rajkumar Dhruw Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Kumar Shrivastava Vs Shri Manoj Kumar Pingua

Ambika Manikpuri Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Bhageerathi Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh