e^^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR /' W.P. (Sl No. ^l k- /2007 PETITIONER ,\)^. "/• tri" r\/' '->\ v"i V.. . -^' ;^'1 y s<u £<" r.-f'' RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1. /-" 2. 3. 4. 5. ^ Smt. Sangeeta Aamde W/o^-.Shri Ashwani Aamde, Aged about- 38^years R/o.- ViUage Jhirouni, Tehsil Kawardha, District : Kabirdham (C.G.) i State of Chhattisgarh' Through - The Secretaiy Department of Womens and Children Developmenit, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Collector, Kawardha, Distt.- Kabirdham (C.G.) ; The Project Officer, Children Welfare Project, Kawai-dha, Distt.- Kabirdham (C.G.) | Smt. Saraswati Bai Kaushik W/o. Vinod Kumar Kaushik R/o.-VUlage - Jhirouni, Distt.- Kabirdham (C,G.) Smt. Rukhmani Devi Manikpuri D/o. Shri Sukritdas Manikpuri, R/o.- Village- Jhirouni, Distt.- Kabirdham (C.G.) \ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIQH COURT OF GHHATTISQARH AT BtL^KiR SINQLE BENCH : HQN'Bi-6 MR. SATISH K. AOMiHOTRi. J. '"^ WRITPETmON(S.»!ii0.9ieW Petitioner Respendente Smt. Sangeeta Aamde State of ChhattisgEn-h and others Present : Mr. Aj'rt Singh, counsei forthe peBtioner. Mr. Satish Gupta, Deputy Qovernment Advocate for the State/respondents No.1 to 3. None appears for respondente No.4 and 5. ORDRR (Passed on 15B1 Day o( February, The peUtioner is one <rf ttie candldatos for appwntment on tha post of Anganbadi Worker at Anganbadi Centers Jhtrouni No.1 and Jhirouni No,2, District Kablrdham. The petitloner has ffied tfiis psBtion chaltenging appointment of rsspondente No.4 and 5 at /mganbadi Centers Jhirouni No.1 and Jhirouni No.2, respectively, on ttie ground that the prtitioner has passed Higher Secondary Schoot CerWeate Examination and she was worldng as Assistant Teaeher in the Shishu Shiksha Kendra at Viltage Jhirouni since 19%. Respondente No.4 and 5 have lesser qualification, i.e., Villth Class pass. 2. The submission of learned counsel appearirag fw the peUSioner on this point is noteed only to be rejected. With regard to the qualification, the Anganbadi Sdieme at Clause 2(1) ctearty provides that a candldate, having Ctass Vlllth examinatlon pass certifleate, should be given priority. In the event, Class Vlitth examinsttion p®ss«i lady candidate Is not available, Higher Secondary Sehool CerUftcrte Examination passed lady candidate may be considered for appolntment. 3. in the present case, admittedly, the petitioner is heving Higher Secondary Schoot Examlnatlon pass certificate and respondents No.4 and 5 are having Ctass Vlllth examination pass certificate. Accordingty, respondents No.4 and 5 have to be prefwred. Fer experienee of woridng as Assistart Teacher, there is no previsien for preference. Accordingly, the appointment of respondents No.4 and 9 Is legal and in accordance with the guidelines for awoiRtment of the Anganbadi Workers. 4. For the reasons stated herelnabove, ttie writ petition is dismissed summarily. No order as to costs. _— Sd/- SatishK. Agnihotri Judge Qopal