HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.768 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioners are working as Ayas in Mini Anganwadi Centres. The 1st petitioner was appointed as Aya at Srirampuram of Kallur Mandal, Khammam District in the year 1999 and the 2nd petitioner was appointed as Aya at Lingapalem in the year 2009. Both of them belong SC category. Recently, Mini Anganwadi Centres were upgraded as Anganwadi centers. Necessity has arisen for appointing Anganwadi Workers in the places of Ayas. The 1st respondent issued notification, dated 10-01-2011, inviting applications for the post of Anganwadi Workers for those two and other centres. The petitioners were not selected on the ground that they are over-aged. The petitioners contend that the Government itself issued instructions to the effect that all the eligible Ayas working in the Mini Anganwadi Centres must be considered for appointment and that the age limit in such cases have been enhanced to 45 years, through G.O.Rt. No.102, dated 28-03-2011. 2. The respondents filed counter – affidavit stating that the G.O.Rt. No.102 does not have retrospective effect and the petitioners cannot avail the benefit thereunder since the notification was issued much earlier thereto. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare. 4. The Government issued memo, dated 03-12-2010, directing that wherever the Mini Anganwadi Centres are upgraded, such of the Ayas, who fulfilled the requirements for the post of Anganwadi Workers, must be appointed as such. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are working as Ayas in the Mini Anganwadi Centres. Notification was issued to fill the posts of Anganwadi workers for the upgraded centers. The only ground on which the 1st respondent did not consider the cases of the petitioners was that the petitioners are over aged. The Government issued G.O.Rt. No.102, dated 28-03- 2011, enhancing the age limit. If the cases of the petitioners were considered with reference to that G.O., they are certainly eligible. It is no doubt true that the G.O. was issued after the notification inviting applications was published. The fact, however, remains that the posts were not filled up by the time, the G.O. was issued. The petitioners cannot be denied the benefit of the G.O. 5. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners taking into account, the memos and orders issued by the Government as regards the eligibility of the Anganwadi Workers. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J September 27, 2011. KTL