IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 20212 of 2008 Between: Smt. Yakkanti Venkata Siva, W/o. Venkata Ranga Reddy, R/o. Naidupalle Colony, Tarlupadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Collector, Prakasam District, at Ongole. 2 The Project Director, District Women and Child Development Corporation, Ongole. 3 The Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Tarlupaldu, Prakasam District. 4 V. Malleswari, W/o. Brahmaiah, R/o. Narra Rangamaveedi Tarlupadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of the respondent authorities in appointing the 4th respondent though she is less qualified than the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of the respondent authorities in appointing the 4th respondent though she is less qualified than the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent authorities to consider and appoint the petitioner for the post of Anganwadi worker of Naidupalle Colony Anganwadi Worker of Turlapadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District,. Counsel for the Petitioner: K.ARUNA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER: Questioning the action of respondents 1 to 3 in selecting the 4th respondent as Anganwadi Worker of Naidupalle colony of Turlapadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, the petitioner filed this writ petition. She has also sought for a consequential direction to appoint her to the said post on the ground that she is more qualified than the 4th respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Palle Srinivas Reddy for respondent No.2, the learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare Department for respondents 1 and 3 and Sri D.Kasim Saheb, learned counsel for the 4th respondent. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the notification issued by the 2nd respondent – Project Director, District Women and Child Development Corporation, Ongole for filling the post of Anganwadi Worker of Tarlapadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, she applied for the said post along with five others including the 4th respondent herein. The qualification for the said post is that the candidate must be local and preference has to be given to the candidate possessing 10th class and in the event of non-availability of the candidate possessing 10th class, 9th class passed candidates have to be considered. Out of the six candidates applied to the said post, four candidates are non- locals and, therefore, their cases were rejected. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though she is the only qualified person possessing 10th class, the respondents have arbitrarily and illegally selected the 4th respondent herein who has passed only 9th class. It is also her case that the 4th respondent is not the native of Markapur town and that after marriage, she came to Naidupalle colony of Turlapadu village and that she never resided at Sanjeevaraopet of Giddalur as stated by her and thus, the transfer certificate produced by her is invented only for the purpose of the obtaining the job. Respondents 1 and 3 have filed a counter affidavit inter alia stating that the Committee Members have conducted the interviews and awarded the marks basing on the 9th class qualification and oral interview. It is stated that the certificates produced by the candidates will be verified for their genuinity with the concerned authorities and if the certificate is proved to be false, action will be taken against the individual. The learned Government Pleader however, conceded that the minimum qualification for the post of Anganwadi Worker is 10th class and only in the event of non-availability of 10th class candidate, 9th class candidate will be considered and in the instant case though the petitioner has passed 10th class, the committee has considered 9th class candidate. The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submits that pursuant to the notification issued by the 2nd respondent, the 4th respondent applied to the said post and after conducting interview, since the authorities found that she is suitable to the said post, she was given appointment. A perusal of the notification issued by the authorities also clearly reveal that the minimum qualification for the post of Anganwadi Worker is 10th class and only in their absence, 9th class candidate would be considered. The list of selected candidates produced by the learned Government Pleader clearly reveals that for the post in question, the Selection Committee has selected the candidate with lesser qualification even though fully qualified person is available. In the circumstances, the appointment of the 4th respondent as Anganwadi Worker of Naidupalle Colony of Turlapadu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District is set aside and respondents 1 to 3 are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for the said post. With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.19.12.2008 Note: Furnish CC in one week (B/o) msv