IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.31392 OF 2010 Date:24.06.2011 Between:- Aram Jyoti Bishoyi and another .. Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary, Women and Child Welfare Department, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.31392 OF 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing Notification No.90/2009, dated 27.11.2010, as illegal and unconstitutional, and consequently direct the respondents to complete the selection process for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker in pursuance of earlier Notification No.90/2009, dated 09.10.2010. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present Writ Petition may be stated as follows: The petitioners are fully eligible and qualified for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker. Respondent No.3 issued notification vide Roc.No.90/2009, dated 09.10.2010 for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker in Nadasandra Village of Meliaputti Mandal. In pursuance of the notification, the petitioners made applications to the above said post. Respondent No.3 issued call letters to the petitioners vide LRc.No.90/2010, dated 26.10.2010, calling them for interview scheduled on 28.10.2010. The name of respondent No.5 was included in the list of interview at 6 p.m. on 28.10.2010 i.e., after completion of interviews. On the application made under Right to Information Act by Ex.M.P.P., respondent No.3 has given reply vide Lr.No.165/2010, dated 27.11.2010, stating that respondent No.5 did not enclose any copy of resignation letter along with her application. Though interviews were over by 1.10 p.m., the name of respondent No.5 is included in the interview list as per the directions of respondent No.4. Respondent No.3 issued fresh notification vide No.90/2009, dated 27.11.2010, in cyclostyled manner by changing the dates calling fresh applications for the said post. Respondent No.5 resigned for the post of Sarpanch and at her behest, the present notification is issued with an ill intention to accommodate respondent No.5 to the post of Anganwadi Worker. 3. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 filed a detailed counter denying the averments made in the petition. First, respondent No.3 has issued a notification, dated 09.10.2010, calling applications for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker in Nadasandra Village of Meliaputti Mandal. In pursuance of the same, the petitioners and respondent No.5 have applied for the said post. All the three persons were asked to appear for interview before the Selection Committee. At the time of interview on 28.10.2010, it is learnt that both the petitioners do not know Telugu language and they know to speak Oriya language only. Therefore, it is very difficult for Nadasandra villagers to understand the language of the petitioners. The nature of duties attached to the post of Anganwadi Worker is that she has to approach the rural women such as pregnant women, lactating mothers and children upto the age of six years, who know only Telugu language. So the Selection Committee has opined that the petitioners are not eligible to the post of Anganwadi Worker. Accordingly, they were not given appointment as Anganwadi Workers of Nadasandra Village. Respondent No.5 was elected as Sarpanch of Nadasandra Village. As per guideline No.12 annexed to the notification issued by respondent No.3, Sarpanch is not entitled to be appointed as Anganwadi Worker and hence, her candidature was rejected. Though respondent No.5 was called for interview, her candidature was not considered as she was elected as Sarpanch of Nadasandra Village. The petitioners possessed all qualifications except speaking and writing Telugu language. Keeping in view of the nature of the duties attached to the post of Anganwadi Worker, as the petitioners do not know Telugu language, they were not appointed as Anganwadi Workers of Nadasandra Village. The posts of Anganwadi Workers in respect of other villages have been filled up. Since the post of Anganwadi Worker in respect of Nadasandra Village could not be filled up for the above reasons, respondent No.3 issued another notification on 27.11.2010 calling applications for the post of Anganwadi Worker. Respondent No.3 does not know whether respondent No.5 has resigned to the post of Sarpanch or not as she has not enclosed any certificate showing that she has resigned to the said post along with her application for the post of Anganwadi Worker of Nadasandra Village. So respondent No.3 has not issued call letter to respondent No.5 but issued call letters to remaining applicants. Both the petitioners have not studied in the State of Andhra Pradesh. They studied 10th class at Bhuvaneswar, Orissa State. They do not know reading and writing in Telugu. Keeping in view of the same, both the petitioners were not selected to the post of Anganwadi Workers. This Court granted interim suspension of operation of notification No.90 of 2009, dated 27.11.2010, for a period of eight weeks. So the District Selection Committee could not complete the selection of Anganwadi Worker in respect of Nadasandra Village. So, the pregnant women, lactating mothers and children are suffering due to lack of services of Anganwadi Worker in Nadasandra Village and lastly, pray to dismiss the writ petition. 4. The petitioners are said to have applied to the post of Anganwadi Workers in Nadasandra Village in pursuance of the Notification No.90/2009, dated 09.10.2010. The respondents got every right to cancel that notification even without assigning any reason and issue a fresh notification. For that reason, the petitioners have no right to challenge the action of the respondents in cancelling the notification or issuing a fresh notification even without cancelling the earlier notification. 5. The reason given by the respondents is that though respondent No.5 was called for interview, her candidature was not considered, as they do not know whether she resigned to the post of Sarpanch or not. The petitioners, who were also called for interview, were not appointed for the simple reason that they do not know to speak and write in Telugu. For the above reasons, they could not fill up the post of Anganwadi Worker. Respondent No.3 issued another notification, dated 27.11.2010. So the respondents are justified in not proceeding further in pursuance of the notification, dated 09.10.2010. Therefore, they issued the present notification dated 27.11.2010. Immediately thereafter, the petitioners filed the present writ petition and obtained stay. If really they know reading and writing in Telugu, they could have applied for the post in pursuance of the notification, dated 27.11.2010. 6. Therefore, the petitioners are directed to submit their applications to the respondents within a period of ten (10) days from today and thereafter, the respondents shall consider all the applications and take an appropriate decision in accordance with the norms and qualifications fixed in the notification. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 24th June, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.31392 OF 2010 Date:24.06.2011 AMD