IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2008 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 8013 of 2008(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JINI.B.S., ATHIRA BHAVAN, VELLAKUZHI, ATHIYANNOOR, ARALYMMOODU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE (B) SECRETARIAT, THIRUVNANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SOCIAL WELFARE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE SOCIAL WELFARE DIRECTOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICE, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, ATHIYANNOOR BLOCK, ATHIYANNOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).8013/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an aspirant for appointment as Anganvadi teacher/helper. According to her, she is qualified for the said post. Her contention is that the norms relating to the appointment of Anganvadi workers are not being followed in the Athiyannoor Block Panchayat. Though the petitioner had submitted an application, it has not been considered. It is also contended that the guidelines, formulated under Ext.P6 Government Order dated 11.10.2006, have not been followed. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. Government Pleader submits that norms under Ext.P6 have subsequently been revised by order dated 6.1.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the material portion of the guidelines have not undergone W.P.(C).8013/2008 2 any change as such. He further submits that if there are vacancies of Anganvadi helpers, the same will have to be filled up in accordance with the guidelines. If there are persons who are eligible to be considered for selection, then there is no reason why temporary appointments should be effected. Petitioner is justified in submitting that the temporary appointments of Anganvadi workers should not be effected, if there are persons who are eligible to be considered on a regular basis in terms of the revised Rules. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of in the following terms: 4. Petitioner may specifically point out these aspects in the form of representation to the second respondent, Director, who shall then cause an enquiry to be made as regards the allegations of the petitioner, with specific reference to the Athiyannoor Block Panchayat. There upon, steps shall be taken by the second respondent to see that appointments to the post of Anganvadi workers in the said Block Panchayat is effected in accordance W.P.(C).8013/2008 3 with the existing guidelines. If the petitioner submits a representation within three weeks from today, needful shall be done by the second respondent within six weeks thereafter. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs