1 W.P No.4050/2010 (S) HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4050/2010 (S) PETITIONER : SMT. USHA URMALIYA Vs. RESPONDENTS : STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS. Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice R.S. Jha. For the petitioner : Shri N. K. Tiwari, Advocate. For respondents 1 to 4 : Shri B. P. Pandey, Govt. Advocate. For respondent no.5 : Shri K. C. Ghildiyal, Advocate -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R (14/09/2011) The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 27.1.201 by which the respondent no.5 has been appointed as Warden of the Hostel of Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidhyalaya, Vijayraghavgarh, District Katni which has been established in Kasturba Gandhi Girls Middle School, Vijayraghavgarh. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in accordance with Annexure P-1, which are the circular and guidelines issued by the State for the purposes of establishing and maintaining the hostel, 2 W.P No.4050/2010 (S) the person appointed as Warden of the hostel has to be a teacher of the selected school which in the instant case is the Kasturba Gandhi Girls Middle School, Vijayraghavgarh and that a teacher from an another school can be appointed as Warden by issuing an advertisement only in case no teacher from the selected/ nominated school is available or in case where teachers of the selected school give their unwillingness in writing. 3. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that without following the procedure as prescribed by Annexure P-1 the respondent authorities have issued an advertisement on 21.7.2009 calling for applications for appointment as Warden. It was stated in the advertisement itself that in respect of the hostel concerned the applicants shall be considered only in case regular teacher is not available. It is also stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that inspite of the fact that the petitioner was willing and available, the respondent authorities appointed the respondent no.5 as Warden of the hostel contrary to the guidelines issued by the authorities, Annexure P-1, although she is not eligible for such appointment as she is not from the same school and is below 40 years of age which is also a necessary requirement as per the circular/guidelines. 3 W.P No.4050/2010 (S) 4. It is stated that, on an objection being raised by the petitioner, the respondent authority has stated that in case the petitioner applies, she shall be accommodated in some other hostel. In such circumstances, it is stated that the appointment of the petitioner as Warden is contrary to law and, therefore, be quashed. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent no.5 submits that the respondent no.5 was appointed after due selection as she was more meritorious than the petitioner and in such circumstances the impugned order does not warrant any interference. The learned counsel further submits that the respondent no.5 is not debarred from being appointed even if the guidelines prefer teachers of the same institution and in such circumstances if the respondent no.5 has been selected and appointed on account of the fact that she is more meritorious than the petitioner, her appointment cannot be found fault with. The learned counsel for respondent no.5 further submits that the petitioner herself was disqualified from being appointed as Warden as she was below 40 years of age on the date of advertisement. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. From a perusal of the record as well as the 4 W.P No.4050/2010 (S) averments made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is undisputed that the respondent no.5 is not a teacher in the selected institution and that she is below 40 years of age. It is also an undisputed fact that, on the contrary, the petitioner is teaching in the selected school and has given her consent and is willing to work as Warden of the hostel. Though the respondent no.5 has stated that the petitioner was below 40 years of age on the date of the advertisement, nothing has been brought on record or placed before this Court on the basis of which the aforesaid allegation of the respondent no.5 could be affirmed. 7. At this stage, it is also pointed out by the learned counsel for respondent no.5 that the appointment of the respondent no.5 by the impugned order dated 27.1.2010 as Warden of the hostel was also for a period of one year which has elapsed with a clause for continuance in case of satisfactory service. 8. In such circumstances, as apparently there is a violation of the circular/guidelines, Annexure P-1, and also keeping in mind the fact that the initial period of one year for which the respondent no.5 was appointed is over, the petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and 5 W.P No.4050/2010 (S) the respondent no.3 is directed to undertake fresh proceedings for appointment of the Warden of the hostel of Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidhyalaya, Vijayraghavgarh, strictly in accordance with the circular and guidelines issued by the State duly considering the claim of the petitioner. 8. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is allowed with the directions as mentioned hereinabove. In the facts and circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to the costs. ( R. S. JHA ) J U D G E 14/09/2011 mms/-