1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2595/2008 Smt. Pramila v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 22nd April, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Arjun Purohit, for the petitioner. .... As a consequent to selection proceedings conducted for the purpose of appointment as Aanganwadi Sahayika, appointment was given to respondent No.5 Smt. Vagtu Devi, challenge to the same is given by this petition for writ. The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that while giving appointment to the respondent No.5 the guidelines prescribed by the respondent No.1 for making appointment as Aanganwadi Karyakarta were not adhered. The writ petition though was presented before this Court on 2.3.2006, but the defects pointed out by the registry were not removed by the petitioner despite several opportunities uptil 17.4.2008. The writ petition, as such was registered only on 17.4.2008. In the matters relating to selection proceedings and appointments the person approaching to 2 the Court should be quite vigilant and any delay in such matters is fatal. In the instant matter it is not in dispute that the appointments were made in the year 2006 and for good two years no care was taken by the petitioner to pursue the matter and that has caused a considerable delay. Such delay in pursuing the matter, even after filing the writ petition by not removing the defects pointed out by the registry, creates valuable right in favour of the selected persons. It is also pertinent to note that the defect pointed out by the registry was quite a minor one i.e. the documents produced were not legible. The petitioner did not choose to remove such a minor defect for more than a period of two years. This clearly indicates that she was not at all interested in pursuing the cause. Be that as it may, by the act of the petitioner this petition for writ suffers from delay and, thus, no interference with the action of the respondents is required to be made. Accordingly, the petition for writ is dismissed. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. Kkm/ps.