Sanjukta Jena Vs Collector,Balasore

“Under the above circumstance, it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order by directing the opposite party no.1 to take decision in the matter of the appeal filed by the petitioner pursuant to the order passed by this Hon’ble Court in OJC No.12348 of 1998 decided on 09.03.2005 and Writ Appeal No.32 of 2005 decided on 25.04.2006.

¶18

And the Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the decision taken by the Sub-Collector, Balasore dated 15.11.2012 vide Annexure-7 and decision taken by the

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

committee dated 31.10.2012 vide Annexure-8 to the writ application.

¶21

And the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the opposite parties more particularly the Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 4 to issue necessary appointment order in favour of the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker of Barabhagia Anganwadi Center without any further delay.

¶22

And for this act of kindness, as in duty bound, the petitioner shall ever pray.”

¶23

Originally being aggrieved by the selection of the present Opposite Party No.5 as Anganwadi Worker of Barabhagia Anganwadi Center in the district of Balasore, the petitioner had approached this Court in OJC No.12348 of 1998. The said writ application was disposed of by order dated 09.03.2005 by directing the authorities to fill up the post afresh by issuing a fresh notification in consonance with the stipulations made in the scheme with further liberty being granted to the petitioner as well as the private Opposite Party to submit their applications. The private Opposite Party carried the matter in Intra-Court appeal being W.A. No.32 of 2005 order dated 25.04.2006. A division bench of this Court did not deem it proper to disturb the order passed by learned Single Judge and clarified that the selection between the parties shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines under which the private Opposite Party was selected. Pursuant to such order, the Opposite Party No.5 was again selected as Anganwadi Worker.

¶24

In course of hearing, inquiry was directed to be conducted by Tahasildar, Khaira. He submitted a detailed report, inter alia, indicating that Bilasini Jena @ Mohanty the private Opposite party is not a permanent resident of village Barabhagia. However, the selection committee in its meeting held on 31.10.2012 selected the

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

Opposite Party No.5.

¶27

The Collector disposed of the matter by directing the SubCollector to take steps for compliance of the order passed by this Court. Pursuant to such order, the Sub-Collector passed a detailed order reiterating the decision taken by the selection committee. The petitioner has approached this Court against this order. Several factual aspects have been raised before this Court relating to the residence of the private Opposite Party as also her date of birth. It goes without saying that this Court exercising writ jurisdiction would not go into the factual aspects, which are best left to be decided by the concerned quasi-judicial authority. Since order of the Sub-Collector emanates from the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Collector and, as stated earlier, involves seriously disputed questions of fact, this Court deems it proper to remit the matter to the Collector to hear the appeal afresh after granting opportunity of hearing to all parties.

¶28

It is needless to mention that the Collector shall consider the reports submitted by the Tahasildar, Khaira as also other evidence that may be adduced and apply his judicial mind to be subjectively satisfied with regard to the merits of the contentions raised before him by the parties. The collector shall thereafter pass reasoned order deciding the matter finally.

¶29

The whole exercise should be completed within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order by the petitioner.

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

( Sashikanta Mishra)

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI GHADAI Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 07-Mar-2025 17:13:08

¶33

Judge

¶34

Puspanjali

¶35

Page 3 of 3

Sanjukta Jena v. Collector,Balasore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjukta Jena v. Collector,Balasore

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

Sumi Chetti Vs the Collector, Nabarangpur

Saroj Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha

Saroj Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha

Samita Kumari Rath Vs State of Orissa

Kalinga Eye Hospital, Dhenkanal Vs Union of India

Sunyalata Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha