IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3710 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 1] Panchashila w/o. Bhujangram Waghmare Age 33 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 2] Usha w/o. Uttam Kamble Age 40 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 3] Vanita w/o. Sakharam Kadam Age 26 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 4] Vandana w/o. Dattatraya Kendre Age 37 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 5] Lalita w/o. Meghaji Rathod Age 28 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 6] Chandrabhaga w/o. Balaji Murkute Age 26 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 7] Rekha w/o. Nathuram Kamble Age 34 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3710 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 8] Savita w/o. Uttam Sarpate Age 26 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 9] Shivnanda w/o. Anand Lomate Age 30 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 10] Vaijantimala w/o. Kishan Sarpate Age 33 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 11] Sujata w/o. Madhavrao Dhavale Age 32 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 12] Anita w/o. Ramrao Khillare Age 36 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 13] Indutai w/o. Siddharth Mahale Age 41 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. 14] Maya w/o. Namdeo Dhole Age 41 years, Occ. Anganwadi Madatnis IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3710 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 3 R/o. Tarado (BK.), Tq. & Dist. Nanded. .. Petitioners. Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra Women and Child Development Department Through the Secretary Mantralaya Mumbai -32. 2] Child Integrated Development Project Officer, (Civil Project) Project No.3, Nanded Sai Sadan Building, First Floor in front of Government Godown VIP Road, Nava Mondha, Nanded. 3] The Chief Executive Officer Child Integrated Development Project Nanded. ... Respondents. Mr. P.V. Mandlik Senior Counsel holding for Mr. A.S. Gandhi, Advocate for petitioner. Mr.K.S. Patil, Assistant Govt. Pleader for respondent No.1 and 2. Mr. V.S. Panpatte, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 20TH AUGUST, 2011. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3710 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 4 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER B.R. GAVAI,J.] :- 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, taken up for final hearing. 2] The petitioners have approached this court, praying for a direction to the respondent to appoint the petitioners to the post of Anganwadi Sevika, under the Integrated Child Development Scheme. The petitioners claimed to be appointed as Anganwadi Madatnis and rendered services as such, for a period of more than 2 years. It is the contention of the petitioners that the petitioners are entitled to be appointed directly as Anganwadi Sevika in view of the Govt. Resolution dated 5th August, 2010. It is the contention of the petitioners that irrespective of there being a specific Government policy in that regard, the respondent authorities have issued advertisement for filling up the posts of Anganwadi Sevika. 3] Shri Vilasrao Panpatte, learned standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 submits that since there is a doubt, as to whether the concerned anganwadis are coming within the urban area or the rural area, the authorities IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3710 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 5 have found it fit to issue the advertisement. 4] The Government Resolution is very clear. Clause 1(C) of the said Govt. Resolution, reads thus :- "If a post of “Aganwadi Sevika” falls vacant and if an “Anganwadi Madatnis” working in that Anganwadi Center fulfills the requisite qualification, the condition of local resident and has experience of two years, she may be directly appointed as “Anganwadi Sevika”." . It is further to be noted that even the Child Development Project Officer, Group B, Class II (Gramin), has also addressed a communication to the Child Development Officer of Urban Project, certifying that the petitioners are duly qualified and eligible to be appointed as Anganwadi Sevika. 6] The respondent authorities are bound to comply with the stipulations, as appearing in the Government Resolution. Though there is a categorical statement made by the petitioners that they are duly qualified and are possessing the necessary qualification, there is no whisper in that regard in the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondents. As such, the said IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3710 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 6 contention will have to be deemed to be accepted by the respondents. There is also a categorical assertion by the petitioners that though the respondents are following the policy in so far as other areas are concerned, it is only the petitioners who are denied the same treatment. There is no denial to this assertion as well. As such, the said assertion also goes uncontroverted. 7] In that view of the matter, the petitioners are entitled for appointment as per the Govt. Resolution dated 5th August, 2010. Writ petition is allowed by quashing and setting aside the advertisement dated 9th April, 2011 and by directing the respondents to issue appointment orders in favour of the petitioners. The same shall be done within a period of 4 weeks from today. Rule made absolute in aforesaid terms, with no orders as to costs. [M.T. JOSHI,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-