The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the setting aside of an appointment as an Anganwari Worker, holding the petition not maintainable because the post is non-statutory and governed only by a Central Government scheme.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.14138 of 2012 Date of decision:27.07.2012
Surjit Kaur& another
......Petitioners
Vs.
State of Punjab& others
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present: Mr. H.S. Virk, Advocate for the petitioners.
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral)
The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 12.04.2012 (Annexure P-15) passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Mehal Kalan, Tehsil & District Barnala, whereby, the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Anganwari Worker has been set aside.
Appointment to the post of Anganwari Worker is not regulated and governed by any statutory provision. Anganwari Workers are recruited in pursuance to a scheme framed by the Central Government. Such position has been noticed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dipitimayee Parida Vs. State of Orissa & otehrs 2008 (4) SCT 568 . In the light of the fact that the post of Anganwari Worker itself is not governed by any statutory provision, as such, the present writ petition itself is not held to be maintainable.
The writ petition is dismissed, accordingly.
(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE
July 27, 2012 harjeet
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging the setting aside of the petitioner's appointment as an Anganwari Worker is maintainable in the absence of a governing statutory provision.
Whether the post of an Anganwari Worker is regulated by any statutory provision or is a non-statutory recruitment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dipitimayee Parida Vs. State of Orissa & otehrsReferred¶12
Dipitimayee Parida Vs. State of Orissa & otehrs 2008 (4) SCT 568
Surjit Kaur
State of Punjab
Tejinder Singh Dhindsa
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
