THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.35031 of 1998 Dated 30-01-2008 Between: D.Prabhavathi. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Project Director, District Women and Child Development Agency, Nellore & others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.35031 of 1998 O R D E R: In this writ petition, a direction is sought to declare the proceedings of the second respondent dated 23-04-1998, cancelling the petitioner’s temporary appointment as an Anganwadi worker of Parlakonda village, at the instance of the third respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. In the impugned proceedings dated 23-04-1998 it is stated that the petitioner’s services were temporarily dispensed with. The grievance of the petitioner is that, though she is a permanent resident of Parlakonda village having married a resident of the said village, the third respondent had refused to give a nativity certificate in order to avoid competition to Smt Vijaya Lakshmi, who happened to be the third respondent’s maternal uncle’s daughter-in-law. The petitioner is said to have made a representation to the Revenue Divisional Officer on 29-11-1997 who in turn is said to have asked the Mandal Revenue Officer to enquire into the matter and issue a nativity certificate if the petitioner was a resident of Parlakonda village. On due enquiry, the Mandal Revenue Officer had issued the nativity certificate, and also a caste certificate, that she belonged to the backward classes. Petitioner would give details of her educational qualifications and the letters of appreciation from various authorities to contend that she is more than competent to hold the post of an Anganwadi worker. She would also question the proceedings of the second respondent dated 23-04-1998 as an order bereft of reasons. She would specifically state that the third respondent had acted surreptitiously, in temporarily dispensing with her services, only to accommodate Smt Vijaya lakshmi, who was related to him. Pursuant to an application filed by Smt K.Lakshmikanthamma this Court, by order in WPMP.No.4290 of 1990 dated 04-03-1999, impleaded her as the fourth respondent and, since she contended that she was working as an Anganwadi worker as on that date, this Court vacated the earlier interim order and, as a consequence thereof, the fourth respondent continues to work as an Anganwadi worker till date. In the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of the second respondent, it is stated that pursuant to the complaint made by the fourth respondent that the petitioner is not a resident of Parlakonda village, the District Collector had temporarily stayed her appointment as one of the requirements, for being appointed as an Anganwadi worker is that the candidate should be a resident of the village concerned. Sri P.Sreedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, would emphasize, placing reliance on several documents filed along with the writ petition, that the petitioner is indeed a resident of the village and the mere fact that her husband is now working elsewhere would not necessitate an inference that she had left the village to stay with her husband. These are all matters which are required to be enquired into by the District Collector after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Any decision taken behind the back of the petitioner, on the complaints of the fourth respondent and others, would not justify dispensing with her services. Since the fourth respondent continues to work as an Anganwadi worker for the past more than 8 years, ends of justice would be met if the first respondent is directed to put the petitioner and the fourth respondent on notice, give them an opportunity of being heard and decide the question as to whether the petitioner was and continues to be a resident of Parlakonda village. Based on the outcome of the enquiry, the District Collector shall take an appropriate decision, in accordance with law, as to whether it is the petitioner, or the fourth respondent, who should be permitted to discharge the functions of an Anganwadi worker at Parlakonda village. The entire exercise in this regard, culminating in passing of a final order, shall be completed at the earliest, in any event, not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________ 30-01-2008 Note:Furnish copy within two weeks B/o usd