Rajbala Yadav W/O Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

[2026:RJ-JP:5502]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11007/2019

Rajbala Yadav W/o Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Fatehpura Kala, Post Kasli, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Women And Child Development Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur

¶8

Director Cum Joint Secretary, Integrated Child Development Services, 2, Jal Path, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur.

¶9

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jaipur

¶10

Sub-Divisional Officer, Kotputli, District Jaipur

¶11

Child Development And Project Officer, Kotputli, District Jaipur.

¶12

Block Development Officer, Panchayati Samiti Kotputli, District Jaipur

¶13

Gram Panchayat Kansali, Panchayat Samiti Kotputli, District Jaipur Through Its Secretary

¶14

Principal, Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidhyapeeth Kul Aanganbadi Worker Training Centre, Hatundi, Ajmer

¶15

Manoj Kumar Narnauliya W/o Sunil Kumar Narnauliya, R/o Village Fatehpura Kala, Post Kasli, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

¶16

----Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. BrijKishore Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Akshit Gupta
	Ms. Pooja Sharma, AAAG for
	Mr. ManojSharma,AAG

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶19

Order

¶20

05/02/2026

¶21

Instant writ petition is preferred by petitioner with following prayer:

¶22

i) by appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the impugned order relieving order dated 22.3.2019

[2026:RJ-JP:5502]

[CW-11007/2019]

(2 of 4)

(Anenx.9) and order dated 28.5.2019 (Annex.11) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

¶27

ii) by appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof the respondents may kindly be directed to allow continue to the petitioner to complete her training and after completion of training petitioner may be permitted to work on the post of Aanganbari worker at Aanganbari Centre Fatehpura Kalan-I, Gram Panchayat Kansali (Kotputli) Jaipur with all consequential benefit.

¶28

The controversy relates to selection on post of Anganwadi for Centre Fatehpur Kalan-I, Village Panchayat Kansali, Jaipur. The material on record indicated that the selection of present petitioner on post of Anganwadi worker was challenged by respondent No. 9 Manoj Kumari by filing SB Civil Writ Petition No. 16058/2017, which was disposed of by this Court on 8.8.2018. While dismissing the writ petition, a coordinate bench has observed that in case petitioner Manoj Kumari files an appeal within two weeks, the appellate authority would consider the same.

¶29

Pursuant to said liberty granted by a coordinate bench, respondent No. 9 Manoj Kumari has filed an appeal before the Deputy Director, Women and Children Development Department, Jaipur, which was dismissed on 20.12.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner, who secured highest marks was directed to join training from 25.2.2019 to 28.3.2019. In the meanwhile, respondent No. 9 has preferred a second appeal before the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jaipur, and the same was decided on 28.5.2019, whereby the second

(3 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:5502]

[CW-11007/2019]

appellate authority has opined that to ensure transparent and fair selection, the entire process has to be re-conducted and issued directions for initiation of fresh selection process on the post of Anganwadi after canceling selection of present petitioner.

¶34

The aggrieved petitioner has filed instant writ petition before this court to challenge order dated 28.5.2019 and relieving order dated 22.3.2019 from training. We have considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

¶35

A perusal of order dated 28.5.2019 indicated that without assigning a reason, CEO Zilla Parishad has drawn a final conclusion about the selection process and decided the second appeal. The reasons are live-links between the minds of the decision taker to the controversy in question and the decision arrived at. The order dated 28.5.2019, sans reasons and we are not able to gather any reasons to allow the appeal, thus it is non-application mind by the CEO, Zila Parishad, Jaipur.

¶36

Time and again it has been said that whenever any decision is taken which adversely affect any of the party, then it is duty of the decision-making authority to assign reason for allowing the appeal or dismissal of the appeal. Thus, the order dated 28.5.2019 is bad in the eye of law.

¶37

Since first appeal has been decided in favour of the petitioner affirming the selection process and without assigning the reason, the selection process was quashed by second appellate authority, which has affected the rights of

[2026:RJ-JP:5502]

[CW-11007/2019]

(4 of 4)

present petitioner therefore it is appropriate not only to quash and set aside order dated 28.05.2019 but direct the CEO Zila Parishad-respondent No.3 to decide the appeal within a period of 30 days from receipt of copy of the order.

¶42

1. In view of aforesaid, the writ petition is partially allowed and order dated 28.05.019 is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent No.3 CEO, Zila Parishad is directed to re-consider and re-hear the appeal preferred by Manoj Kumari (respondent No.9) after opportunity of hearing to all the parties.

¶43

The CEO is also directed to pass a speaking and reasoned order but in case, appeal is decided in favour of present petitioner then petitioner be given appointment as Anganwadi worker, where she has been selected and sent for training. In case second appeal is allowed and selection proceeded is quashed and set aside then candidature of petitioner be considered in fresh selection process.

¶44

The petitioner is directed to appear before CEO, Zila Parishad on 18.02.2026 for disposal of second appeal.

¶45

Instant writ petition and misc. application, if any, stands disposed of.

¶46

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶47

PREETI VALECHA /46

Rajbala Yadav W/O Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajbala Yadav W/O Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

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

Ker Singh Gurjar S/O. Sh. Kamal Singh Gurjar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Smt. Beena Sharma W/O Rajesh Chaturvedi Vs State of Rajasthan

Aslam Sher Khan @ Chintu S/O Ahmed Ali Vs State of Rajasthan

Karan Jareda S/O Samay Singh Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rajkumar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Kintu Kumari D/O Shri Mahendra Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan