IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7749 of 2008 Between: Ippili Tulasamma W/o.Babu Rao, Harimandalam Srikakulam Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary to the Govt of A.P Women Development Child Welfare and Disabled Welfare Department Hyd 2 The Dist Collector-Cum-Chairman, of Section in Appointment of Anganwadi Workers Srikakulam Dist 3 The Project Officer Dist Women and Child Development Centre Srikakulam Dist 4 The Project Officer I.C.D.S Kotturu Srikakulam Dist 5 Muddada Vijalakshmi W/o.Rajarao, Kallata(V) Hiramandam Srikakulam Dist .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the appointment of the 5th respondent as Anganwadi worker of Tallata Colony vide proceedings dt.20-2-2008 in R.C No.107/06 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents herein to conduct fresh interviews as per law and guidelines issued by the Govt and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAVI SHANKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7749 of 2008 ORDER: To appoint an Anganwadi Worker for Kallata Village, Hiramandalam, Srikakulam District, a notification was issued by the 3rd respondent on 20.02.2006. The petitioner, 5th respondent and certain others applied. Interviews were conducted on 18.02.2007. Through his order, dated 19.02.2008, the 3rd respondent appointed the 5th respondent as the Anganwadi Worker. The same is challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner contends that the selection committee was incomplete, on account of the absence of substantial number of members thereof, including the District Collector, and that serious irregularity has crept into the selection process and the consequential appointment. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare. The District Collector, 2nd respondent herein, is said to be the Chairman of the selection committee. In case, the selections have taken place, without his participation, or contrary to any regulations, he can certainly rectify them, and thereafter, ensure compliance with the relevant provisions. This Court finds it difficult to entertain the writ petition, straight away, at this stage. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent with necessary representation. On receipt of such representation, the 2nd respondent shall issue notice, to the affected parties, and pass appropriate orders, within a period of three (3) months from the date of presentation. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 10.04.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7749 of 2008 Date: 10.04.2008 JSU