IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 190 of 2011 (S/S) Smt. Monika ………..Petitioner. Versus Chief Development Officer, District U.S. Nagar and others. ………Respondents. Present: Mr. J.S. Bisht, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Indu Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1 to 4. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.(Oral) Heard Mr. J.S. Bisht, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Indu Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Under a Scheme started in the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh, somewhere in late 80s, which continued in the State of Uttarakhand, “Angan Bari Workers” are appointed in “Angan Bari Centres”, which are situated almost in all villages. It is a village level appointment made by the concerned Child Development Project Officer. The selection and appointment procedure of “Angan Bari Karyakatri”, “Sahayika Angan Bari Karyakatri” and “Mini Angan Bari Karyakatri” are presently governed by various Government Orders but primarily by Government Orders dated 24th February, 2009, 3rd September, 2009 and 31st May, 2010. The main scheme today is given in a Government Order issued by the Government of Uttarakhand on 24th February, 2009. These are all admitted facts. 2 As per the said Government Orders, reference whereof has already been given above, a selection committee at Block Level is first constituted. A procedure is prescribed for constituting this Selection Committee. Thereafter procedure is also prescribed how the various vacancies of “Angan Bari Workers” will be advertised for all the “Angan Bari Centres” and how the selection will be made by the Selection Committee and what will be the eligibility as well as the priorities given to a candidate in this selection. It will be needless to elaborate on this aspect at the present juncture. As per the procedure prescribed in the Government Order dated 24th February, 2009, the Selection Committee shall publish a “tentative select list”, to be notified at various places including the Block Level Offices, so that if anybody wants to raise objections on these selections, he or she would be free to make such objections. The cases where no objections are made, the tentative selection list becomes final and the Child Development Project Officer issues appointment letter to such a candidate. In cases where objections are received, the matter is referred to the Appellate Authority, which is constituted under the Government Order dated 24th February, 2009. The body of the Appellate Authority constituted is as follows: “1. Chief Development Officer- Chairman 2. A person nominated by the District Magistrate, who must be at least Class-II Officer, and, 3. District Programme Officer, who will be the member Secretary of this appellate body. The Appellate Authority after considering the objections passes appropriate order therein. The Appellate Authority has to take a decision on this matter 3 within 15 days as per the Government Order dated 24.2.2009. “Angan Bari Worker” has to be a woman. The petitioner being a woman moved an application for being appointed as an “Angan Bari Worker” for “Angan Bari Centre – Tiliyapur, Teshsil Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar. The contention of the petitioner is that the duly constituted Selection Committee found the petitioner suitable for appointment as an “Angan Bari Worker” and thereafter published a tentative select list, in which her name figured. Thereafter objections were called and since no objections were raised the tentative select list became final and the petitioner was given appointment. Subsequently, the appointment was cancelled vide order dated 1.1.2011 on the ground that there are some complaints to the higher authorities. It is this order which has been challenged by the petitioner. Although the Government Orders, referred above, do not provide an avenue for redressal of grievance in such cases inasmuch as the Appellate Authority can hear only the matters where there is a dispute on tentative select list, yet since a forum has already been created under the Government Order dated 24th February, 2009, the Appellate Authority is directed to look into the matter. Since the order impugned has been passed without giving an opportunity of hearing or show-cause to the petitioner, the same is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority to look into the matter. It is made clear that merely because the impugned order has been set aside, it would not automatically mean that the petitioner is reinstated as “Angan Bari Worker”. 4 It must be clarified that though an appointment of an “Angan Bari Worker” is only under a Government Scheme yet for those “Angan Bari workers” who are so appointed, it carries a great meaning as the candidates for this work belong to the deprived or rather financially insecure stratum of our society who reside in a village. Even amongst them, in most cases, they are widows, divorced women, etc. Subject to just objections, these women have a legitimate expectation to be appointed as an “Angan Bari Worker” once their names figure in the tentative select list. It is also true that if merely one is selected one does not get any indefeasible right for appointment, yet it is equally true that if the appointment is denied, plausible reasons must exist for such a denial! The Appellate Authority is hence directed to take a decision on this matter by passing a speaking order as expeditiously as possible but in no case beyond a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. It is, however, directed that in case some body else has been selected and appointed as “Angan Bari Worker” for that centre in the meanwhile then before passing any orders she would also be heard. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 25.3.2011 kuldeep