IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 7566 of 2008 Between: S. Sailaja W/o. Ramachandram R/o. Narayanpur, Yellareddi Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman of Selection Committee and District Collector, Karimnagar. 2 The Member Convenor/Project Director District Women and Child Development Agency, Karimnagar. 3 The Member, Selection Committee/ District Medical and Health Officer,Karimnagar. 4 The Revenue Divisional Officer-Cum-Chairman, Nominee of Selection Committee, Sircilla, Karimnagar District. 5 The Child Development Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Sircilla, Karimnagar District. 6 Gangakumari W/o.Ramachandram, R/o. Narayanpur Village, Yellareddipet Mandal, Karimnagar 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 in the nature of Mandamus declaring that the petitioner is entitled for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker of Narayanpur Village, Yellareddipet Mandal, Karimnagar District pursuant to selections held on 5-10-2007 with all consequential benefits by holding the action of the respondents in not considering the claim of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker of Narayanpur Village even though the petitioner had secured more marks than the 6th Respondent under the guise of correspondence between the respondents is as illegal, arbitrary unjust violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution besides being opposed to all canons of equity justice and fair play. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.D.BALA KISHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following: The second respondent initiated steps for appointing Anganwadi Workers and Ayas in Siricilla area. After inviting applications from the eligible candidates, the Selection Committee, the first respondent herein, conducted a written test and interviews. The petitioner, sixth respondent and certain others applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker for Narayanpur Village of Yellareddypet Mandal, Karimnagar District. Vide proceedings, dated 18.01.2008, the second respondent appointed the sixth respondent as Anganwadi Worker. The petitioner approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, the fourth respondent, for necessary information about the particulars of selection. Vide memo, dated 05.03.2008, the fourth respondent informed the petitioner that certain mistakes have crept into the process and the correction of the same is under consideration by the second respondent. This writ petition is filed assailing the appointment of the sixth respondent. Heard Sri D.Balakishan Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare for respondents 1 to 5, and Sri D.Linga Rao, the learned counsel for the sixth respondent. After perusing the record and on finding that the fourth respondent himself admitted that mistake has crept into the process of selection, this Court passed an interim order on 08.04.2008, directing the second respondent to take necessary steps on the basis of the correct record, duly issuing notice to the petitioner as well as the sixth respondent. It is now represented that the second respondent issued a memo, dated 25.04.2008, setting aside the appointment of the sixth respondent and appointing the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker for Narayanpur Village. A perusal of the memo, dated 25.04.2008, discloses that the petitioner secured 41 marks (34 in written test and 7 in oral interview), whereas the sixth respondent secured 37 (27 ½ in written test and 9 ½ in oral interview). When the selection was based upon the performance in a written test and interview, it has to be guided by the marks secured therein. The mistake, which was committed on an earlier occasion, has since been corrected. The grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Respondents 1 to 5 shall consider the case of the sixth respondent, in case she is otherwise eligible to be appointed against any other existing vacancy and she shall also be paid the salary for the period during which she worked. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:16.06.2008. kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}