1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7124/2006 (Asha Chandna Vs. State of Ram. & Ors.) Date of order : 16.5.2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Manish Pitaliya, for the petitioner. Mr. Rameshwar Dave, Dy. Govt. Counsel. Mr. Sandeep Shah, for the respondents. In this case, the petitioner has challenged the order/proposal dated 29.5.2006 (Annexure-3) passed by Gram Panchayat, Napawali, Panchayat Samiti Bhadesar, Distt. Chittorgarh. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that an application was filed by the petitioner for selection as 'aanganwari worker' as she is possessing the qualification of Senior Higher Secondary, which is prescribed for appointment on the post of 'aanganwari worker'. It is also pointed out that the petitioner's candidature was considered and 2 rejected on the ground that the petitioner is possessing qualification for recruitment on the post of A.N.M., therefore, at any stage, she can get appointment and she can left the job of 'aanganwari worker'. The candidature of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that she was selected for training of A.N.M. Course and she can be appointed at any time on the post and in that event, she will left the job. The contention of the petitioner is that this resolution was passed upon the presumption by the Gram Panchayat whereas till today, she is unemployed and no appointment has been made, so also her candidature was rejected on illegal ground that she is possessing higher qualification and the candidate who was provided appointment was having lesser qualification, therefore, the resolution may be quashed. Upon perusal of the said resolution whereby the petitioner's case was considered, I am unable to accept the ground which is taken for rejection of the petitioner's candidature that she can left the job at any time and in the event of his selection on the post of A.N.M. Obviously, the petitioner was eligible to be appointed as 'aanaganwari worker' and the respondent No.5 is only ninth pass and according to Annexure-R/2, the qualification for 'aanganwari worker, is secondary and in the event of non- availability of the candidate, the appointment can be 3 offered to the candidate having lesser qualification. Admittedly, on the date of consideration for appointment, petitioner was only qualified candidate and she was denied appointment on illegal grounds. In these circumstances, the impugned resolution dated 29.5.2006 (Annexure-3) is not sustainable in law and hence, it is hereby set aside. The case is remitted to the Gram Panchayat Napawali, Panchayat Samiti Bhadesar, Distt. Chittorgarh for fresh decision within a period of two months from today. It is also made clear that if the petitioner has already been appointed elsewhere, then the appointment provided to the respondent No.5 shall not be disturbed. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. arun