Single judge dismissed a writ petition challenging the selection list of Anganwadi Workers. The court held the petitioner lacked locus standi as she was neither a candidate nor aggrieved. It found no illegality because the authority proceeded per guidelines after the petitioner's non-cooperation.
null
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.
W.P.C. NO.9760 of 2009
1
8 09.02.2021
The matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.
Heard Mr. S.G. Das on behalf of Mr. L. Samantaray, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.P. Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition to quash the select list prepared by the authority concerned under Annexure-6 and further seeks direction to go for fresh selection to the post of Anganwadi Workers in Aska Block.
Mr. S.G. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner, who is the Chairperson of the selection committee and Vice-Chairperson of Aska Panchayat Samiti, has approached this Court alleging arbitrary power exercised by the authority in selecting the Anwanwadi Workers in respect of Aska Block violating the of guidelines issued by the Government. It is further contended that the petitioner being the competent person to preside over the selection committee, has not been given opportunity, thereby the entire selection is vitiated.
Mr. B.P. Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate contended that the petitioner has no locus standi to file this writ petition as she is neither a candidate nor is person aggrieved by such selection. More so due to non-cooperation, as per the guideline the selection process was initiated and accordingly
2
selection was concluded by giving appointment to the candidates selected under Annexure-6. Thereby, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority concerned in selecting the candidates to the post of Anganwadi Workers.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, it appears that the petitioner was elected as Vice-Chairperson of Aska Panchayat Samiti and as per the guidelines issued by the Government, for selection of Anganwadi Workers is the Chairman of the selection committee. An advertisement was issued on 04.06.2009 under Annexure-1 for engagement of Anganwadi Workers in respect of 50 Anganwadi Centres under Aska Panchayat Samiti, pursuant to which candidates submitted their applications. After receipt of such applications, objection was called for to be submitted by 10.06.2007. As per guidelines, the selection committee shall consist of Chairperson/Vice-Chairperson, Medical Officer of the PHC, Block Development Officer, Social Education Officer of the Block as members and CDPO of the Block shall be the Member-Convenor of the committee. Opposite party no.4 vide letter dated 11.06.2009 intimated the petitioner to fix a date before 17.06.2009 for selection committee meeting of Anganwadi Workers, pursuant to which though the petitioner conducted the meeting, but the selection process was not concluded. In the meantime, the selection to the post of
3
Anganwadi Workers has been done and the select list has been prepared vide Annexure-6. As it appears due to non-cooperation of the petitioner, the Collector, Ganjam conducted an enquiry as per the direction given by this Court and selection process was initiated. But the petitioner being the Chairperson of the selection committee-cum-Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti having not cooperated in the selection despite due intimation in keeping with the guidelines May, 2007 and Clause-(g) of the process had to be completed, which reads as follows:
“In case the Chairman of the Selection Committee does not finalise the list within the stipulated time, the same will be put up to Sub-Collector for approval in case of rural projects and A.D.M. in case of urban projects and the matter should be disposed within seven days.”
The Collector, Ganjam intimated the petitioner to remain present on 27.07.2009 at 11.00 in the office of CDPO and she had to Chair the selection committee. But, even after receipt of the same, since the petitioner did not co-operate, selection process had to be completed keeping with Clause-(g) of the aforesaid guideline.
In view of such position, this Court is of the considered view that when the guideline prescribes that the selection to be conducted in presence of Chairperson and if she did not cooperate, it cannot be said that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority concerned in preparing the select list.
4
Accordingly, this court is not inclined to interfere with select list prepared by the authority concerned under Annexure-6. More so, the select list is prepared and the selected candidates, whose names are found place in the list, have not been made parties to this writ petition. Thereby, the writ petition suffers from nonjoinder of proper parties. Therefore, the writ petition merits no consideration and accordingly, the same is dismissed.
…..………………………… Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.
Alok
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the selection list of Anganwadi Workers deserves interference when the petitioner, a key official in the selection committee, refused to cooperate with the proces
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to challenge the selection not contesting her candidacy.
Whether the selection list must be quashed due to irregularities caused by the non-cooperation of the Chairperson of the selection committee.
L. Samantaray
State of Orissa
Dr. B.R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
