IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17940 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision : 29.01.2010. Sukhbir Kaur .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.B.S.Jaswal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, Punjab. Mr.,R.K.Arora, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr.Sanjay Dhiman, Advocate, for respondent No.4. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to quash the appointment of respondent No.4 as Anganwari Helper in village Daburji, Tehsil Majitha, District Amritsar. Despite several opportunities, the official respondents have not come forward with their counter-reply though respondent No.4, who is also a contesting respondent, has filed her reply-affidavit. There is no denial to the fact that as per the criteria contained in the memo dated 5.3.2007 (Annexure P-1) sent by the Office of Child Development Project Officer, Majitha, District Amritsar, to the Sarpanch C.W.P.No .17940 of 2007 (O&M) 2 of the Gram Panchayat village Daburji, Block Majitha, District Amritsar, the candidates were required to possess the qualifications mentioned therein to be eligible for appointment as Anganwari workers. Clauses 3, 5 & 6 of the aforesaid circular being relevant, are reproduced below:- “3. Copy of resolution passed and approved in this behalf may also be sent alongwith applications, in which it should be mentioned that proper publicity was given and whose applications are being sent are of higher merit amongst the applicants. 4. xx xx xx xx 5. Qualification of Anganwari worker should be minimum matric. 6. Anganwari helper should be minimum primary pass....” It is the admitted fact that though the petitioner is a matriculate, respondent No.4 is not even primary pass as she is said to have passed 4th class examination only. It is also not in dispute that the Gram Panchayat of the village Daburji, had recommended the name of the petitioner for appointment as Anganwari helper but over-looking those recommendations, the 4th respondent has been appointed as Anganwari helper, giving rise to this writ petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the records. In view of the conceded position that respondent No.4 does not possess that requisite qualification prescribed for appointment as Anganwari Helper, her appointment on the said post cannot sustain. For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed; the C.W.P.No .17940 of 2007 (O&M) 3 appointment of respondent No.4 as Anganwari Helper is set-aside and respondent Nos.1 to 3 are directed to initiate fresh process for selection and appointment to the said post of Anganwari helper from amongst the eligible candidates. The needful shall be done at the earliest and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 29-01-2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE