Dismissed

Sobha Devi v. State Th.Social Welfare Deptt.and Ors.

J&K HC14 Sept 2021SWP/250/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought quashing of appointment of a rival candidate as an Anganwari Worker, alleging discrimination in selection and eligibility. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that marriage solemnized outside the project area disqualifies the applicant, relying on a prior Division Bench decision.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as it is without merit; appointment of rival candidate upheld.

Sobha Devi Vs State Th.Social Welfare Deptt.and Ors. — Service and Employment | J&K HC (2021)

¶1

Sr. No. 7

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

Case: SWP No. 250 of 2007

¶4

Sobha Devi

¶5

.....Appellant/Petitioner(s)

¶6

Through :- Mr. Gagan Basotra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Navdeep Kour, Adv.

¶7

v/s

¶8

State of J&K and others

¶9

.....Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. KDS Kotwal, Dy. AG

¶10

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing the order

¶13

of appointment of respondent No. 5 as Anganwari Worker for Anganwari Centre at Village Kail Padhai and further for commanding the respondents to appoint her as Anganwari Worker for the aforesaid Anganwari Centre on the ground that she, being eligible for the post of Anganwari Worker for Anganwari Centre, Kail Padhai, filled up the form in the month of February, 2005 that was accepted by the official respondents.

¶14

It is stated in the petition that the petitioner was eligible to apply for the said centre for the post of Anganwari Worker being permanent resident of village Kail Padhai that is evident from her qualification certificate as well as PRC. It is further stated that the petitioner was interviewed, but the official respondents instead of selecting the petitioner selected respondent No. 5 for the said post at Anganwari Centre, Kail Padhai though the merit of the petitioner was higher than respondent No. 5. It is further stated that the petitioner came to know from reliable sources that objections have been raised by respondent

¶15

2 SWP No. 250 of 2007

¶16

No.5 that the petitioner was not resident of Village Kail Padhai. It is further case of the petitioner that at the time of filling up of the form in February, 2005, the petitioner was unmarried and was resident of village Kail Padhai. The petitioner got married on 27.04.2005 and the result was declared on 10.02.2006.

¶17

Response has been filed by respondents No. 1 to 4 in which it is stated that Anganwari Workers are honorary workers and not regular Government servants. The main objection that has been taken by the official respondents is that the petitioner got married on 27.04.2005 with Sh. Narain Dutt R/o Village Kaw Kashid, Tehsil Billawar, District Kathua. It is further stated that as the petitioner was married outside the project area Majalta Tehsil

¶18

Ramnagar, as such, she was not selected despite having higher merit.

¶19

solemnization of marriage outside area of project would not deny the petitioner of her right to be engaged as Anganwari Worker.

¶20

Per contra , learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Division Bench of this Court has already considered the issue with regard to the marriage of the proposed candidate to be engaged as Anwganwari Worker. To buttress his argument, he placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this court in case titled as Naseema Bano v. State of J&K and others reported in 2010 (4) JKJ[HC].

¶21

6. Admittedly, at the time of the declaration of the result, the petitioner has not been residing at a place where the Angawari Centre is situated and if the petitioner is engaged as a Anganwari Worker in the said

¶22

SWP No. 250 of 2007

¶23

¶24

centre, the whole purpose of the Scheme shall be defeated. The said issue stands already covered by the judgment (supra).

¶25

Viewed thus, this petition is found to be without any merit and is,

¶26

accordingly, dismissed.

¶27

(RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE

¶28

JAMMU 14.09.2021 Paramjeet

¶29

Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No

Sobha Devi v. State Th.Social Welfare Deptt.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sobha Devi v. State Th.Social Welfare Deptt.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Tarsem Lal Vs State Th.Health and Med.Edu.and Ors.

Wazir Singh and Anr. Vs Uoi.Th.Minis.of Human Resource and Ors.

Pushakar Nath Bhat Vs State Th.Dist.Magistrte,Anantnag and Anr.

Sarfu Ram Vs State of J and K

Ashok Kumar Vs State Th.S.S.P.Vigilance and Anr.

Pavitar Singh and Anr. Vs State Th.Home Deptt.and Ors.