CWP 2056/2008 29.6.2009: Present: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Deputy Advocate Generals. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent No.2 issued notification dated 31.10.2006 whereby applications were invited for the post of Anganwadi Worker in Gram Panchayat, Khani. Respondent No.3 submitted application for the post of Anganwadi Worker. She was called for interview on 22.12.2006 by respondent No.2. However, in the meantime, one Smt. Dolma Devi made a representation to respondent No.2 on 9.4.2007 seeking her transfer from Anganwadi Centre, Kamand to Anganwadi Centre, Khun. The application was accepted and she was transferred from Anganwadi Centre, Kamand to Anganwadi Centre, Khun. She joined her duties on 16.4.2007. The resultant vacancy of Anganwadi Worker Kamand was filled in by way of appointment of one Smt. Guddi Devi. In other words, the process initiated by respondent No.2 for filling up the post of Anganwadi Worker on the basis of notification dated 31.10.2006 was not completed. Respondent No.3 approached this Court by way of CWP No.663 of 2007. The same was allowed by this Court on 11.11.2008. The transfer of Smt. Dolma Devi was quashed and she was reverted back to Anganwadi Centre Kamand. The appointment of Smt. Guddi Devi as Anganwadi Worker at Anganwadi Centre Kamand was also declared void. Respondent No.2 did not implement the judgment dated 11.11.2008. Respondent No.3 preferred COPC No. 32/2009. Respondent No.2 undertook to appoint the petitioner pursuant to judgment dated 11.11.2008. Consequently, COPC No. 32/2009 was disposed of on 7.4.2009. Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate has strenuously argued that respondent No.2 had initiated the process for filling up the post of Anganwadi Worker, Khuni in the month of January, 2009. The petitioner was offered appointment on 13.3.2009. However, the same was cancelled on 4.4.2009 without issuing any show cause notice. Mr. R.K. Bawa, learned advocate General has supported the cancellation order dated 4.4.2009. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. The action of respondent No.2 to initiate the process for filling up the post of Anganwadi Worker for Anganwadi Centre Khuni was against the letter and spirit of the judgment dated 11.11.2008. He knew throughout that the appointment of Smt. Dolma Devi and Smt. Guddi Devi was already quashed by this Court and the State was directed to complete the selection process on the basis of interview held on 22.12.2006. Mr. Bimal Gupta has argued that respondent No.3 has also submitted application for considering her case for the post of Anganwadi Worker pursuant to which the interviews were held on 7.3.2009. He has not substantiated this submission by producing any tangible evidence on record. Respondent No.3 was not required to participate at all in the new selection process which on the face of it was bad in law after the judgment dated 11.11.2008 rendered by this in CWP No.663/2007. There was no need for respondent No.2 to initiate the process afresh at all for filling up the post of Anganwadi Worker in the year 2009. The exercise undertaken by him was bad in law and it amounted to over reaching the judgment of this Court. In these circumstances, the petitioner could not be interviewed for the post in question since the Court had specifically directed the respondent-State to complete the process which was initiated earlier and the interviews were held on 22.12.2006. Consequently, the action of respondents No.1 and 2 to offer appointment to the petitioner on 13.3.2009 was illegal. In these circumstances, there is no flaw or illegality in the order whereby the petitioner’s appointment has been cancelled. The Court disproves the manner in which respondent No.2 has conducted himself despite the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 663/2007. In view of the observations made hereinabove, the petitioner was not required to be heard before the cancellation of her appointment as urged by Mr. Bimal Gupta. The cancellation of her appointment was the consequence of judgment dated 11.11.2008 in CWP No. 663/2007. Accordingly, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. No costs. (Jagdish Bhalla), C.J. (Rajiv Sharma),J. June 29, 2009 *Awasthi*