IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7316 of 2009 Between: C. Sulochana, D/o. Waman Singh, working as Anganwadi Worker at Gurralathanada, Boath Mandal, Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Joint Director, I.C.DS. Women and Child Welfare Department, A.P. Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Deputy Director, I.C.DS. Women and Child Welfare Department, Warangal. 3 The Project Director, I.C.DS. Women and Child Welfare Department, Adilabad, Adilabad 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Judgment dt. 27-2-2007 in OA No. 3146/2006 on the file of the Hon'ble APAT as illegal, null and void and unconstitutional and consequently declare that the petitioner is entitled for appointment to the post of Supervisor Grade-II in preference to the Juniors who are not having Bala Sevika Training Certificate with all consequential benefits, by holding the action of the respondents in not selecting the petitioner and selecting the ineligible candidates who are juniors to the petitioner and not having Bala Sevika Training Certificate is as illegal, discriminatory, arbitrary, and subversive of Articles 14, 16 of the constitution of India and fair play and pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7316 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) Assailing the order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A. No. 3146 of 2006, dated 27.2.2007, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The facts in brief are that the petitioner who belongs to B.C. (D) (Mathura) community was initially appointed as Anganwadi worker on 18.2.1987. She was also sent for Bala Sevika Training by the respondents and she claims to have completed the said Course at Hyderabad in the year 1989-90 as in-service candidate. A Certificate to that effect was also issued to the petitioner. While so, the respondents issued a notification on 16.3.2006 proposing to fill up 18 posts of Supervisors Grade-II in ICDS Project of Adilabad District on contract basis. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioner also appeared for the said examination. However, the petitioner could not get selected as Supervisor Grade II. Assailing her non-selection, the petitioner filed O.A. No. 3146 of 2006 before the Tribunal seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint her as Grade-II Supervisor in ICDS Project of Adilabad District. The Tribunal, through the impugned order, dismissed the aforesaid O.A. Hence, the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though the petitioner was eligible and fully qualified, the respondents selected the candidates who are far junior to her and who did not possess the Bala Sevika Training Certificate. Learned counsel further contends that the Tribunal dismissed the O.A. quite mechanically without taking into consideration the fact that the respondents have awarded more marks to the candidates who did not possess Bala Sevika Training Certificate. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order requires to be set aside and the writ petition needs to be allowed. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Services-II submitted that the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference. On a perusal of the impugned order of the Tribunal, it is seen that the petitioner who appeared for the written test of Grade II Supervisors has secured only 29 marks in the written test and 5 marks were awarded to her as weightage for possessing Bala Sevika Training Certificate. In all, the petitioner secured 34 marks; whereas the last candidate who belonged to B.C. community and who was selected as Supervisor Grade II, had secured 38 marks. Inasmuch as the petitioner appeared for the written test and subjected herself to the selection process with the other competing candidates, she cannot now contend that she was awarded less marks than the other candidates on the ground of her non-selection. The Tribunal, therefore, taking all these facts into consideration, rightly dismissed the O.A. Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J DATE: 8th April, 2009 _________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY,J pnb