IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 OP.No. 1695 of 2000(B) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- RAJANI T.M., D/O.MUKUNDAN, MOVVENI HOUSE, KOTTAMALA P.O., NILESWAR (VIA), NARIKILAKKAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ SRI.RAJESH THOMAS SRI.DILIP MOHAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. GOPALAKRISHNA BHAT, ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD. 3. M.NARAYANAN, MLA, KANHANGAD. 4. K.P.NARAYANAN, C.P.A.AREA SECRETARY, NILESHWAR, KANHANGAD. 5. SABU ABRAHAM, C.P.M. AREA COMMITTEE MEMBER, NILESHWAR, KANHANGAD. .6. SUHARA SAMAD, BLOCK PANCHAYAT PRESIDENT, NILESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 7. P.V.JANAKI, DISTRICT PANCHAYATMEMBER, P.O.THIMIRI, VIA. CHERUVATHOOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. OP. NO.1695/2000 8. HEMALATHA, PRESIDENT, VALIYA PARAMBU PANCHAYATH, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 9. K.V.KUNHIRAMAN, NAIR, PRESIDENT, KINANUR KARINTHALAM PANCHAYAT, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 10. K.JANU, C.P.I.(M) OFFICE, NILESHWAR P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 11. K.KANNAN MASTER, VADAKKUMPAD, P.O. CHERUVATHOOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 12. SHOBHA, DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER, KASARAGOD. ADDL.R13 TO R20 ARE IMPLEADED. 13. PUSHPAVALLIC., W/O.P.RAJAN, 'AKSHAYA', P.O. KAYYOOR, VIA, CHERUVATHUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 14. PREMALATHA T., W/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN M.K.V., VELLAT, KLAYIKKODE P.O., CHERUVATHUR VIA, KASARAGOD DIST. 15. RAMANI C.V., D/O.K.KUNHIKANNAN, PALATHERA, THIMIRI P.O., CHERUVATHUR VIA, KASARAGOD DIST. 16 . CHANDRAMATHI P., D/O. V.AMBUNHI, KUTHIRUMMAL HOUSE, KLAYIKKODE P.O., CHERUVATHUR VIA, KASARAGOD. 17. RATHI K., W/O. P.K.NARI, KANDATHIL HOUSE, KAYYOOR P.O., CHERUVATHUR VIA., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 18. CHANDRAMATHI P., D/O. KUNHAMBU, MUZHAKKOTH, P.O., KLAYIKKODE, VIA, CHERUVATHUR , KASARAGOD DISTRICT. OP. NO.1695/2000 19. SANTHA C.V.,. D/O. C.V.POKKEN, PALOTH HOUSE, P.O.KAYYOOR, VIA, CHERUVATHUR, KASARAGOD DIST. 20. SREELATHA K. D/O. V.V.NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, VATTOD, VOLIYA POYIL P.O., CHERUVATHUR VIA., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. IMPLEADED AS ADDL. RESPONDENTS 13 TO 20 AS PER THE ORDER DT. 19.6.2002 IN CMP. 29215/2002. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA BABU SRI.G.JANARDHANA KURUP THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP. NO.1695/2000 ORDER ON CMP. NO.2634/2000 IN OP. NO.1695/2000 DISMISSED 19.03.2008 SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.S.U.(MS) NO.30/99/SWD DT. 21.7.99. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.NO.1695 of 2000-B - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT The substantial challenge in this original petition is against the selection conducted by the selection committee appointed by the Government for the purpose of selecting Anganvadi workers and helpers to various projects in the districts Kasaragod, Kottayam, Palakkad and Thrissur. The petitioners also participated in the selection process and on finding that their names are not included in the rank list, this original petition was filed. 2. The petitioner has raised various grounds to challenge the selection process. It is submitted that the interview was a farce and candidates were being selected only on the basis of their political allegiance. It is also pointed out that the members of the interview board were all illiterate and therefore they were not competent to conduct the interview. The sum and substance of the contention raised by the petitioner is that no proper selection was conducted and what was done is only preparation of a list in accordance with the political affiliation. 3. The first respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit justifying OP 1695/2000 -2- the selection process. It is pointed out that the selection committee for the maintenance of Neelishwar Project was constituted with the District Collector as the Chairman or his representative, the local M.P. or his representative, local M.L.A. and other functionaries at the local level. The last date for receipt of applications was 18.8.1999 which was extended due to the conduct of the Lok Sabha elections. It is pointed out in the counter affidavit that the selection was conducted in accordance with the guidelines issued for the same and the marks were awarded to the candidates based on their qualifications and as prescribed in the guidelines. Details have been given in para 6 of the counter affidavit. The petitioner was also called for interview that she had been included as rank No.43 in the list for West Eleri Panchayat. In the counter affidavit, there is total denial of the averments made by the petitioner regarding political allegiance of the interview board members, etc. It is submitted that a proper interview was conducted and therefore, there is no substance in the allegation. It may be noticed herein that even though initially this court was pleased to grant an interim order of stay, subsequently after hearing the impleaded respondents, the stay was vacated and in Writ Appeal No.2148/2002, the interim order vacating the stay was confirmed. 4. Going by the averments in the counter affidavit, I find that there is OP 1695/2000 -3- no substance in the allegations raised by the petitioner. After having undergone the selection process, the petitioners cannot challenge the constitution of the committee. Apart from that, no glaring illegalities or irregularities have been pointed out by the petitioner which will have the effect of vitiating the entire process of selection. There is no evidence to support the averments regarding political affiliation of the candidates and the like. It is also to be noticed that the respondents have conducted the selection process in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government and the authorities from time to time. Therefore, I find that the prayer seeking to quash the entire selection process, cannot be granted. The original petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ OP 1695/2000 -4- T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P. No.1695 of 2000-B - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 19th March, 2008.