CWP No.11224 of 2011.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.11224 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.07.2011 **** Kuldeep Kaur . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate for the petitioner ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner was appointed as an Anganwadi Worker in Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur. It is her categoric case that she is physically challenged and disabled to the extent of 50%. The petitioner has been working as Anganwadi Worker since 30th December, 2009. It appears that respondent No.5 – Smt. Parminder Kaur made a complaint against one Paramjit Kaur when the petitioner was not even appointed as an Anganwadi Worker. Pursuant to that complaint some enquiry was held in which the petitioner was not associated. However, as per the said enquiry report, the authorities have come to the conclusion that the complainant Smt. Parminder Kaur CWP No.11224 of 2011.doc - 2 – (respondent No.5) has a preferential claim for appointment as Anganwadi Worker being the widow of village Sarwarpur. (2). The petitioner, on the other hand, has taken a categoric stand that had she been associated in the enquiry proceedings, she would have proved that Parminder Kaur is not a widow and has performed ‘kareva marriage’ and is duly married with Karamjit Singh who is younger brother of her deceased husband. (3). A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Sukhdev Kaur v. State of Punjab & Ors. (CWP No.4799 of 2009) has held that no writ petition is maintainable in the matters pertaining to the appointment of Anganwadi Workers. (4). In this view of the matter, it appears expedient to relegate the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy as may be available to her in law. However, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is working as Anganwadi Worker since December, 2009 and is statedly a physically challenged person, I deem it appropriate to stay the operation of the order dated 03.06.2011 (Annexure P5) whereby the petitioner has been directed to be relieved from the post of Anganwadi Worker. Resultantly, the petitioner shall be allowed to continue as Anganwadi Worker subject to the following conditions:- CWP No.11224 of 2011.doc - 3 – i. The above-stated interim relief shall operate for a period of two months; ii. The petitioner, if so advised, may challenge the impugned orders before the appropriate forum within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. She may also apply for ad interim stay; iii. The appropriate forum, to which the petitioner might approach, shall decide the application for interim stay within one month from the date of its filing; iv. The above-stated interim order shall cause no prejudice to respondent No.5 or any other candidate; (5). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 07.07.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge