1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO: 4825/2008 (Smt.Indu w/o Pyarelal Patle vs. Zila Parishad Gondia and others ) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. ................................................................................................................................... CORAM: D.D.SINHA & A.P.BHANGALE,JJ. DATED: 18 th June, 2009. 1. Heard Mr P N Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr A Y Kapgate, learned counsel for Respondents 1 to 3. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is in respect of the procedure adopted by the Selection Committee for selecting Anganwadi Sevika held on 29.5.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the Government Circular dated 12.3.2008, allocation of marks for different heads are prescribed in the chart which is annexed with the Circular (Annexure “E” to the petition). However, the Selection Committee has allotted the marks on the basis of the chart which was in existence prior to 12.3.2008. It is, therefore, contended that the procedure adopted by the Committee for allocation of 2 marks in the process of interview is not valid since it is not based on the relevant chart which was in existence at the time of interview. Hence the entire selection process is bad in law. 3. Mr Kapgate, learned counsel for the Zilla Parishad,on the other hand, has submitted that the recruitment process of Anganwadi Sevika was initiated way back in the year 2006. On 31.10.2006 interviews were held at 390 places in entire Gondia District; however, at later point of time, it was noticed that some irregularities were committed at some Centers and, therefore, the interview process undertaken by the Zilla Parishad at 30 different Centers was cancelled and those who participated in the earlier interview were only candidate, again, called for fresh interview conducted by Zilla Parishad on 29.5.2009. The present petitioner appeared before the Selection Committee for the second time on 29.5.2008 for interview. The counsel for Zilla Parishad has submitted that before the Circular dated 12.3.2008, the allocation of marks was required to be done on the basis of chart which is annexed with the petition at Page No.25 of the petition. So far as the petitioner is concerned, she appeared for interview on 31.10.2006; however, the process of interview was cancelled and, therefore, fresh interviews were held on 29.5.2008. 3 The present petitioner participated in the said process and, therefore, the allocation of marks by the Committee was required to be done on the basis of the old chart. It is submitted that the procedure of allocation of marks by the Committee-members is, therefore, just and proper and is also sustainable in law. 4. Considered the rival contentions. On the backdrop of the above-referred facts, it is evident that the process of selection/recruitment was initiated way back in 2006 and, therefore, the Selection Committee was expected to allocate marks to the candidates who appeared in the interview including the petitioner, as per the old chart and, therefore, the procedure adopted by the members of the Selection Committee while allocating marks to the candidates, including the petitioner who appeared for interview on 29.5.2009, appears to be consistent with the procedure applicable in this regard. 5. No case is made out for showing indulgence. Writ Petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE sahare