IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2007 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(C).No. 26517 of 2007(F) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- SHOBHANA. T, ANGANVADI HELPER, CENTRE NO. 78, THERUVATHU KADAVU, NADUVANNUR GAMA PANCHAYATH. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPUAM. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. THE CHILD DEVELOMENT PROJECT OFFICER, ICDS, BALUSSERY BLOCK. 4. SHOBHANA, KALAMULLATHIL (HOUSE) KAVIL P.O. NADUVANNUR (VIA) KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE (DIST) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.26517 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of November 2007 JUDGMENT The petitioner is an Anganwadi Helper in Centre No.78 in Naduvannur Grama Panchayath. The third respondent has been appointed as an Anganwadi worker in another Anganwadi. According to the petitioner she ought to have been appointed in preference to a new person from outside. In a statement filed by the third respondent, it is stated that the third respondent was selected by a selection committee, a list was published and the District Officer has approved the said list also. In fact the petitioner did not apply pursuant to an invitation for applications. 2. In the circumstances, I do not find any grounds to interfere with the selection of the second respondent. But it is made clear that the petitioner’s claim for appointment as an Anganwadi Worker on the strength of her services as an Anganwadi Helper will be considered in the next arising vacancy provided the petitioner makes an application as and when the vacancy arises. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and I have only issued a direction to consider the claim in accordance with law. Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed of. V.GIRI, JUDGE css