Dismissed

H N Netravathi v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 May 2023WP/14138/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner, a widow from Alilughatta village, challenged the appointment of the fifth respondent, also a widow and resident of the same village, to a post of Anganawadi Worker. The court rejected the petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition rejected; appointment of Respondent 5 confirmed.

H N Netravathi Vs State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 14138 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.14138 OF 2019 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

H. N. NETRAVATHI W/O LATE BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS ALILUGHATTA-572222 GUBBI TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. JYOTHI S.K., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G S PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOMENT AND DISABLED & SENIOR CITIZENS, EMPOWERMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001.

¶15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU DISTRICT TUMKURU-572 101.

¶16

DEPUTY DIRECTOR & MEMBER/SELECTION COMMITTEE DEPT. OF WOMEN & CHILD WELFARE TUMAKURU-572 101.

¶17

¶18

WP No. 14138 of 2019

¶19

CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER DEPT. OF WOMEN & CHILD WELFARE TUMAKURU-572 101.

¶20

NAGARATHNAMMA W/O LATE NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS MARRUHOLE VILLAGE HULIYAR HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMAKUR DISTRICT-572 101.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. M.S. NAGARAJA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; NOTICE TO R5 DISPENSED WITH)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

¶24

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.02.2019 ISSUED BY

¶25

THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 APPOINTING THE RESPONDENT 5 AS ANGANWADI WORKER TO ALILUGHATTA-A ANGANWADI CENTRE [SL NO.1] [ANNEXURE-R] AND ETC.

¶26

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the appointment of fifth respondent to the post of Anganawadi

¶29

¶30

WP No. 14138 of 2019

¶31

Worker of Alilughatta-A Anganawadi Centre, Gubbi Taluk, Tumakuru District.

¶32

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶33

Pursuant to the Notification issued by the respondent – authorities, both the petitioner and fifth respondent have made an application to the post of Anganawadi Worker enclosing residential certificate. The respondent – authority, by its order dated 25.02.2019, appointed the fifth respondent to the post of Anganawadi Worker and feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioner has presented this writ petition.

¶34

I have heard Smt. Jyothi S.K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. M.S. Nagaraja, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶35

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the fifth respondent is not a resident of Alilughatta Village, Gubbi Taluk and the petitioner is a widow and therefore, the respondent – authority ought to have appointed the petitioner to the post of Anganawadi Worker at Alilughatta-A Anganwadi Centre, Gubbi Taluk.

¶36

¶37

WP No. 14138 of 2019

¶38

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the fifth respondent is also the resident of Alilughatta-A Village as per Annexure-J and therefore sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶39

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and taking into account the factual aspects on record wherein both the petitioner as well as fifth respondent have made application seeking appointment to the post of Anganawadi Worker at Alilughatta-A Anganawadi Centre, Gubbi Taluk and further, perusal of Annexure-J – residential certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Hagalawadi Hobli, Gubbi Taluk would substantiate the fact that the fifth respondent is a resident of Alilughatta-A Village and in that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶40

In so far as the second limb of argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a widow and hence, petitioner ought to have been appointed as Anganawadi Worker, and in this regard, as the fifth respondent is also a widow, the respondent – authorities are justified in appointing the fifth respondent to the post of Anganawadi

¶41

¶42

WP No. 14138 of 2019

¶43

Worker to Alilughatta-A Anganawadi Centre, Gubbi Taluk, Tumakuru District.

¶44

Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected.

¶45

SD/JUDGE

¶46

sac

¶47

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

H N Netravathi v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H N Netravathi v. State of Karnataka

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. Roopa. N. M. Vs the Principal Secretary

Naushad Ali Sayed Vs the New Mangalore Port Trust

Shri S Vishwanath Vs the State of Karnataka

M Erasappa Vs Joint Registrar of Co. Operative Societies

Chandranaik G Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Lingamma Vs the Karnataka Co-Operative