a- iM c f-\ft& INTHEHICmCOURT<M<nTDIGAflJRi^a!ff^]EIiASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS .f^ ^ -.••*".""<-<» ^s^ >**•" ^f< wiMT.iiainowlisi.^NilliSBi1^/ '^ ::;,',.. ^. kausl:dr^aBai;§s^;pov^ Tatisil-Pandariya, ^y^.'Z-^isa'tS District- Kabeer Dham, ^(Chhattisgarh). VERSUS : /l. Stale bf Chhattisgarti, Throug]-^ Secretary,. Womeii artd (ghild Etevelcipin^nf,?jl3®partinenC, • ;, DiK.S. Bliawan, Raipur .•^e-G-)-' '•. ^ <<'2. CoUector,Kabeer Dham Dist-Kabirdham(C.G.). /3. Additiohal, ColleGtQr; Kabeerdiiam; District- Kabeerdham (C.G.) A. DistrictChild andWoihen Developinetlt QfHcer, Dist:- Kabeer Dham (C.G.j. 5. Preiject OfBcer, integrated Child Developrnent Project, Tahsil- Pandariya, District- ' i Kabeer Dham(C.G.). 6. JanpadPanchayat, • Pandariya, Throughits ; .; • #" • ':":':'' •: '••• ;..; •'••••1 ChiefEbcecutive Officer. Dist-Kabirdham :'ys—_:.^•• "•' __. ••' ., .•"••_ .. .,•.,. . ..:^;';: _;; •,.:,^1'' "'• y7. ] <^JTL Panchayat, A^ ttirougKits Secretaly.;,,.:.^.•s.^: ; 'Tahsil-.,.:'.:,''::;,^aHdariya,,,:;1'^ Distriet-KabeeF Dharct ' ' i :.:,:::''^^.G.},- •;.;;^;-^ / y ^ / ^. 8. Shahtosh¥adav w/oRamavataryadav v R/o Village- Amldeeha, Talisil- Pandariya, Ertstriet- KaheerDham (C;G.) ^^' ...•..•::.;.:'\ -:: •:1 WRITPETITIONUNI)E^ARTICI^226<)FC^NSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUING^^^^^^^^^^^^ CEaynomA, Airy ^HSE^ Ap^ROi^iATE ORDER. ': • ' : ''::: •:.:: .:- , ;- . ' '•:, ^~~II^S z' \fr. •*<ss. H|GH^QURTOUUD!CATURIE<afflATnSGMH:BILASroR StNG(,EBEN<;H:HON'BLESHRIS.K.AGNlHOTR|,J. PETITIQNER RESPONDENTS SfitE^SUte^&sUSBZ KaushliyaBai ^EBSUS State of Chhatlisgarh and others. Present: Shri Rajeey Shmastava, counsel fOrthe petifioner. ShriSatishGupta,Dy.G.A.fortheState/respondentsNo. 1 to5. / , QRDER j[%ssed on 02 lFebruary^2007) The petitioner belonging to Scheduled Caste commynity was appointed as 'Anganbadi Worker' on 08-11-2006 inGram Panchayat Amldiha, village Barejahapara, Tahsil Pandariya, District Kabeerdham, The petitioner was issued a show cause noticeon 22-11-2006 (Annexure P/4) to explain about the allegations made agairist her with all documents, before the Additional Collector, Kabeerdham. The Additional Gollector, Kabeerdham vide order dated 26-12-2006 (Annexure P/5) after having noticed that the petitioner had passed 7th Class certificate examination andtheobjectorcandidate/rsspbndentNo.8washavingpassed8thClass certificate examination and both Sre the local residents of village Barejahapara, cancelled the appointment of the petitioner and appointed responcfentNo.8 in place ofthe petitioner. Being aggrieyed, the petitioner has impugnedtheorderdated 26-12-20£B^nnexuFeP®)Qntfteground that the Anganbadi Seheme for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker provides that first preference should be given to Seheduled Caste/Scheduted Tribe candidates. 'y < ^ -z- (2) According to the fearned counsel for the petitioner, the qualification is a desirable qualification and not essential qualification. The Scheme cteariy provides that the AnganbadiWorker has to maintain the records for various serviees performed by ffiem, as such minimum qualification required isS'^CIasspassed. Inthe said Scheme it is written as under:- "ara: ^i? tfiy^ tj^ <t>i44>^^to ?fi ^q? W1? ^ ?T ^l^i^HW^qlNT ^ x^ %4^^^ ^^^^ f^f^^^<il<;qfNT^^^^^^ sr'ro lifNr^^ 1?f^ ^ ^i" (3) From the perusal of entire Scheme, it appears that the word 'desirable' has to be understood in the contextof the Scheme. Eighth Class passed is an essential basic qualification and the preference comes Uiereafter. It is further prescribed that in case 8^ CIassfpassed candidate is not available, 7 Class passed candidata may be considered. Ih the present case, respondent No.8 is having basic quatification of 8 standard, thus she is more sujtabteand fitfor appointment and grant of preference comes thereafter. In the said Schsme there are several preferences like widow, divorcee, Membeis liying below poverty line, MembersofSchedutedCasteandScheduleclTnbeCommuratyete.lnthe present case, the petitioner though belongs to Scheduled Caste Commuhity, but she does not possess basic qualification of 8th Class passed Certificate and the objector/r®spondentNo.8 is haying the 8 Class passed Certificate. (4) In w'ew of tte foregoing reasons, this petition is dismissed summarily. Noorderastocoste. 1 -Satiste|B®§ Judge; c^ l^ H£'"s~-sg%^i'®i;£^i^