THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.3198 OF 2008 DATED 9TH DECEMBER, 2010 BETWEEN Smt.Puripanda Meenakumari … Petitioner And The State of A.P. Rep. by its State Project Director, DPEP, Hyderabad and Others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.3198 OF 2008 O R D E R The petitioner, a candidate for appointment as an Anganwadi Worker in respect of the 17th Ward of Bobbili Municipality, challenges the proceedings dated 04.02.2008 whereby the fourth respondent was selected and appointed to the said post. The Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Bobbili Urban, Vizianagaram District, the third respondent, issued notification dated 03.10.2007 calling for applications for recruitment to the posts of Anganwadi Worker and Anganwadi Helper in Vizianagaram District. Interviews were held on 08.12.2007. The petitioner and the fourth respondent were both candidates for the post of Anganwadi Worker in the 17th Ward of Bobbili Town. The fourth respondent was selected and appointed under the impugned proceedings dated 04.02.2008. It is the contention of the petitioner that as per the proceedings dated 21.08.2002 issued by the Director, Women Development and Child Welfare Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, preference ought to have been given to her as she worked as an ECE Instructor from the year 1999 upto the year 2007. It is on this basis that the petitioner assails the rejection of her candidature in favour of the fourth respondent. The learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare submitted that the instructions obtaining under the proceedings dated 21.08.2002 stood nullified after the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.21, Women Development, Child Welfare & Disabled Welfare (ICDS) Department, 24.08.2007. Reference is made to clause 4 of the said G.O. which states to the effect that the guidelines issued thereunder supercede all earlier guidelines. By way of the said G.O., new guidelines were put in place for selection of Anganwadi Workers. For the purposes of this case, it is relevant to note that as per these guidelines a candidate for the post of Anganwadi Worker was required to pass Class-X. It is only if no Class- X passed candidate was available that a candidate with higher qualification would be selected. The list of eligible applications which were entertained in respect of the subject selection indicates that the selected candidate, the fourth respondent, possessed a pass in Class- X whereas the petitioner was a Graduate. The fourth respondent therefore had a preferential right to be considered over and above the petitioner in terms of the new guidelines. In such circumstances, the petitioner can have no grievance with regard to the selection and appointment of the fourth respondent overlooking her candidature. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ---------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR, J. 9TH DECEMBER, 2010 PGS/VGSR