IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4842 of 2008 Between: M. Mahalakshmi W/o. Mogili Swamynatham R/o. H.No.6-468, Y.Y. Colony, Jaggayyapeta, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Selection Committee of Anganwadi Workers Krishna District, rep. by its Chairman, District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. 2 The ICDS Project Director, Woman and Child Welfare, District Committee of Anganwadi Workers, Ashoknagar, 5th road, Near ITI Bus Stop, Vijayawada. 3 Smt. Dasari Krishnaveni @ Mogili Krishnaveni D/o. Dasari Venkateswarlu, R/o. H.No.6-423, Near New Kalyanamantapam, Y.Y. Colony, Jaggayyapeta, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in selecting / appointing the 3rd respondent as Anganwadi worker of 8th Ward Jaggayyapet village by their proceeding in Rc.No.356/A3/07, dated 29.01.2008, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and contrary to the guide lines relating to appointment of Anganwadi workers and accordingly set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker of 8th Ward Jaggayyapet Village, in the interests of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER: The second respondent issued a notification, dated 01.09.2007, inviting applications for selection of candidates, for appointment as Anganwadi Workers in Jaggayyapeta Town, for Ward Nos.8 and 9. The vacancy was earmarked for SC/ST candidates. The petitioner, the third respondent and certain other candidates had applied. After causing verification and selection, the third respondent was appointed as Anganwadi Worker. The petitioner challenges the same. It is urged that though the third respondent is a resident of the locality and holds the requisite qualifications, she did not file the certificate of family planning, which is essential as per the notification. Learned Government Pleader for respondent 1 and 2, on the other hand, submits that the third respondent was a pregnant, as on the date of notification, and in that view of the matter, she could not file the Family Planning Certificate. He contends that the certificate becomes necessary, only in cases where the applicants have two children. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare. It is, no doubt, true that one of the requirements, mentioned in the notification issued by the second respondent, is that the certificate in proof of undergoing family planning must be enclosed. That, however, cannot be viewed in isolation. It applies only to such cases where the applicants have two or more children. The petitioner had enclosed a copy of the birth certificate issued by the Nagara Panchayat, Jaggayyapeta, which discloses that the third respondent gave birth to a child on 18.01.2008. When admittedly the third respondent was pregnant as on the date of notification, the question of requiring her to submit a certificate in proof of undergoing family planning, does not arise. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.02.05.2008 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J GJ ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}