Laxmi Nandini Madhi Vs State of Odisha

An advertisement was issued by the CDPO, Podia in the district of Malkangiri on 05.02.2021 inviting applications from intending candidates for their engagement as Anganwadi Worker of different Anganwadi Centers including Podia-1 Anganwadi Center. The petitioner and the opposite party No.6 were candidates along with others. In the selection process, though the opposite party No. 6 was found to have secured the highest marks, the Selection Committee did not accept her candidature on the ground that she had not furnished the residence certificate as per requirement. In fact, she appears to have submitted a residence certificate of the year 2019. The petitioner was thus selected and engaged as

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

Anganwadi Worker.

¶16

The opposite party No. 6 filed an appeal being Misc. Case Appeal (AWW) No.1 of 2022 before the ADM, Malkangiri, challenging the engagement of the petitioner. In course of hearing of the appeal, the CDPO, Podia submitted that the residence certificate furnished by the opposite party No.6 was issued in the year, 2019, which was in violation of the guidelines for the advertisement. Further, opposite party No. 6 had also not submitted a fresh residence certificate for which the Selection Committee decided to cancel her candidature. Observing thus, the ADM, referred to two resolutions of the Government in the Department of Revenue and Disaster Management and Women and Child Development to hold that the opposite party No.6 being a meritorious candidate was eligible for appointment. As such, the appointment of the petitioner was set aside and the CDPO was directed to take fresh steps for appointment of the opposite party No.6. Challenging such order of the Appellate Authority, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶17

Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the opposite party No.6 had filed the appeal challenging the selection of the petitioner and implicitly her non-selection on the ground of absence of fresh residence certificate. The fact that she had submitted a residence certificate of the year, 2019, which was the reason for her nonselection, was considered by the Appellate Authority but no adjudication on such point was made. Brushing aside the said point, the Appellate Authority simply took note of the fact that the opposite party No. 6 had secured the highest marks and on such basis allowed her claim. Since the question of selection of the petitioner and non-selection of the opposite party No.6 on a specific

¶18

Page 2 of 3

¶19

ground was placed before the Appellate Authority, it was incumbent upon him to have considered the same and pass a reasoned order either accepting the recommendation of the Selection Committee or rejecting the same. In either case, proper reasons ought to have been assigned. Since such exercise was not undertaken, the impugned order is rendered unsustainable in the eye of law.

¶20

Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the ADM-cum-Appellate Authority, Malkangiri to hear the appeal afresh after granting opportunity of hearing to all concerned. It is made clear that in considering the appeal, the Appellate Authority shall take note of the grounds on which the Selection Committee had decided to select the petitioner. The appeal shall be disposed of as early as possible preferably, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order by either of the parties. Since it is submitted that the petitioner is continuing as Anganwadi Worker, she shall be permitted to so continue till disposal of the appeal and thereafter, depending on the decision in the appeal.

¶21

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶22

BC. Tudu

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: BHIGAL CHANDRA TUDU Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cutt ack Date: 17-Jan-2025 15:29:22

¶25

Page 3 of 3

Laxmi Nandini Madhi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmi Nandini Madhi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Annapurna Sahoo Vs Govt of Odisha

Sivram Kewat Vs State of Odisha

Augastin Joseph Vs Union of India

Sudhansu Bariha Vs State of Odisha

Smruti Ranjan Behera Vs State of Odisha

Dipti @Deepti Lima Vs State of Odisha