IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.4211 of 2007 Between: M. Padmavathi W/o. H. Ramanjaneyulu R/o. Obaganipalli Village, Kambadur Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 The Project Director, District Women ad Child Development Agency, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur District. 4 Vijaya lakshmi W/o. Ramachandra Anantapur 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 appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in appointing the 4th respondent as Anganwadi Volunteer for Obaganipalli Village of Kambadur Mandal, Anantapur District, without considering the object of the scheme illegal, arbitrary in violation of guidelines and in violation of Art. 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner as Anganwadi Volunteer for Obaganipalli Village of Kambadur Mandal, Anantapur District in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.D.GOWD Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.4211 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the appointment of the fourth respondent as Anganwadi Volunteer for Obaganipalli Village o f Kambadur Mandal, Anantapur District by respondents 1 to 3 without considering the object of the scheme. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is more qualified than the fourth respondent and ignoring the merit and other qualifications, the fourth respondent was selected as Anganwadi Volunteer for Obaganipalli Village of Kambadur Mandal, Anantapur District. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the fourth respondent stating as under: “In pursuance of the Notification issued, four candidates were applied for Obaganipalli Village. Smt.Padmavathi, petitioner herein is also one of the candidates and she passed S.S.C examination with an aggregate of 48% marks and she has also been issued a Residence Certificate as Obiganipalli (v) of Kambadur Mandal by the Mandal Revenue Offic er, Kambadur. But whereas the respondent No.4 Smt.Vijayamma also passed 10th Class with an aggregate of 62% and she has also passed type writing in lower grade. T h e Mandal Revenue Officer, Kambadur has issued a Nativity Certificate to Smt.Vijayamma as Obiganipalli (v). During the oral interview conducted by the District Selection Committee, the respondent No.4 faired well. Therefore her candidature has been considered. More over the vacancy is O.C. General Category only.” Taking into consideration the averments made in the counter- affidavit that the fourth respondent has passed 10th Class with more percentage of marks when compared to the petitioner and also passed type writing lower grade, which the petitioner does not have, and also in view of the fact that the vacancy is meant for the Open Category, and taking into consideration the merit and candidature, the fourth respondent was selected, I do not see any infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. N.V.RAMANA, J Dt.24.11.2008 va