IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 314 of 2011 (S/S) Smt. Kaushalya Bisht ………..Petitioner. Versus Director of Women Empowerment and Child Development, Dehradun and others. ………Respondents. Present: Mr. Amish Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1 to 4. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.(Oral) Heard Mr. Amish Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. The petitioner was a candidate for appointment as “Angan Bari Worker” for Angan Bari Centre-Hawalbagh, District Almora. Though the name of the petitioner figured in the tentative select list, yet since complaint was made by respondent no. 5, the matter was sent to the Appellate Authority constituted under Government Order dated 24th February, 2009. Subsequently, the Appellate Authority cancelled the candidature of the present petitioner and in her place, respondent no. 5 was appointed. This Court has already held in its order dated 25.3.2011 passed in Writ Petition No. 116 of 2011 that there is inherent flaw in Government Order dated 24th February, 2009, which though prescribes an elaborate procedure for eligibility, selection and appointment of “Angan Bari Workers”, yet does not give any opportunity of hearing to those candidates, whose names figure in the “tentative select list” at the time when complaints are 2 raised for their selection and the Appellate Authority without hearing them cancels their candidatures. Similar controversy has already been decided by this Court in its order dated 25.3.2011 in Writ Petition No. 116 of 2011 (S/S). Therefore, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the order dated 25.3.2011 passed in the said writ petition. The Appellate Authority constituted under the Government Order dated 24th February, 2009 is hereby directed to hear the present petitioner as well as the present incumbent i.e. “Angan Bari Karyakatri” Smt. Sushma Arya who is respondent no. 5 in the present writ petition, and after hearing them pass a speaking order therein. It is made clear that since Smt. Sushma Arya has already been appointed as “Angan Bari Worker”, although this Court finds flaw in the procedure of appointment, no interference is being called for by this Court and the matter is referred to the Appellate Authority and it is expected that the Appellate Authority will act with due fairness and in accordance with the principles of natural justice and fair play. The Appellate Authority is hence directed to take a decision on this matter by passing a speaking order as expeditiously as possible but in no case beyond a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it. The petitioner will be at liberty to produce before the Appellate Authority the relevant documents, which she so wishes. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 7.4.2011 Rathour