Petitioner challenged arbitrary appointment of respondent no. 6 as Anganbadi Sevika. Respondent argued petitioner lacked requisite qualification. Court dismissed the petition, holding appointment must be done as per rules.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4734 of 2013
Chhabi Murmo … … Petitioner
VERSUS
… … Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE DR JUSTICE S.N. PATHAK
For the Petitioner xxx For the Respondents Mr. Mano Kumar, GA-III Mr. Rakesh Kumar Roy, AC
07/01.02.2023 Heard learned counsel for the respondents. None appears on behalf of petitioner in spite of repeated call.
Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to appoint her to the post of Sevika under the Anganbari Scheme for the centre of Ranga Panchayat in place of respondent no. 6 as she does not fulfil the requisite criteria for appointment.
According to the petitioner, in view of Circular of the Welfare Department, an Aam Sabha was held in Ranga Panchayat of Narayanpur Tola, Dumka for appointment of Aanbanri Sevika. Petitioner having requisite qualification for the same, applied along with respondent no. 6 for appointment. It is specific case of the petitioner that though she fulfils the requisite qualification and criteria for appointment, illegally and arbitrarily, in collusion with the respondents, the respondent no. 6 was appointed. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner has knocked door of this Court.
Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned GA-III assisted by Mr. Rakesh Kumar Roy, draws attention of this Court towards paragraph-9 of the counter affidavit and further submits that in light of Memo No. 351, dated 12.03.2013, issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dumka an Aam Sabha
RC/
2
was held on 12.04.2013 for appointment of Sevika for Aanganbari Centre 05, Ranga East under the Chairmanship of Block Development Officer, Masalia and Lady Supervisor, Mukhiya, ANM and Head Master, Utkramit Madhya Vidyalaya, Ranga were the members of said Aam Sabha. 71 villagers participated in the said Aam Sabha for selection of Aanganbari Sevika among the seven candidates and the petitioner and the respondent no. 6 herein were also the candidates in which qualification of the petitioner is non-matric and qualification of the respondent no. 6 is I.A. pass and as such the Selection Committee recommended name of the respondent no. 6 – Miloni Kisku, who was the best candidate amongst all other eligible candidates and as such her name was recommended as per Rule. Since petitioner does not fulfil the requisite qualification for appointment, rightly her name was not recommended.
Be that as it may, since almost nine years have passed, respondent no. 6 is still continuing on the said post, the appointment has been done as per rules, admittedly respondent no. 6 was having requisite qualification and fulfilling other conditions and was found to be best amongst all other candidates and as such rightly her name was recommended for appointment. Claim of the petitioner cannot be entertained merely because she had participated in the selection process, she cannot claim appointment on the said post without fulfilling requisite qualification. Any appointment has to be done as per Rule. Appointment dehors the rule cannot be appreciated.
No case is made out for any interference.
The writ petition is devoid of any merits and as such the same is hereby dismissed.
(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)
RC/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition can be entertained to direct appointment when the candidate does not fulfill requisite qualification.
Chhabi Murmo
State of Jharkhand
Deputy Commissioner, Dumka
Miloni Kisku
S.N. Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
