THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18437 of 2011 ORDER: Way back in the year 2007, respondent No.3 issued a notification inviting applications for selecting the candidates for appointment of Anganwadi Workers for various Villages including Kandlapalli of Sarangapur Mandal, Karimnagar District. The petitioner and one Thogalli Srilatha submitted applications in respect of a vacancy. Srilatha was selected and the petitioner was placed at Serial No.2 in the select list. On a complaint submitted by the petitioner, the respondents enquired into the eligibility of the selected candidate. It ultimately emerged that Srilatha was not eligible and accordingly, she was removed from service. The grievance of the petitioner is that instead of appointing her as Anganwadi Worker, respondent No.3 is taking steps to invite applications afresh. On behalf of the respondents, respondent No.3 filed a counter-affidavit. She admitted that the petitioner and Srilatha submitted applications and the latter was selected as Anganwadi Worker. It is also stated that through Memo, dated 08.06.2011, the competent authority had removed Srilatha from service on finding that she was not eligible. She further stated that a notification was issued on 10.06.2011 informing the villagers that the post of Anganwadi Worker is vacant. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare. The petitioner no doubt was placed at Serial No.2 and the candidate at Serial No.1 was selected for the post of Anganwadi Worker for Kandlapalli Village. Once the appointment of the selected candidate was set aside, it is but natural that the next in the order must be issued, orders of appointment. The Anganwadi centre is denied of an incumbent for the past four years. There cannot be any justification to keep the post vacant any longer. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.3 to issue orders of appointment to the petitioner in case she has been placed at Serial No.2 in the select list, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:17.08.2011 kdl THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1902 of 2011 ORDER: The writ petitioner and the contesting respondents filed a joint memo with a prayer to record the settlement said to have been arrived at between them on 15.07.2011. A copy of the settlement is enclosed. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned counsel for the contesting respondents submit that in view of the settlement, the lis in the writ petition does not survive. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the settlement, dated 15.07.2011. This Court passed an order on 28.04.2011 in W.P.M.P.No.2334 of 2011 and W.V.M.P.No.1395 of 2011. The said applications were disposed of by directing that a sum of Rs.12,36,258/- is said to have been deposited by the writ petitioner with the Registry of the Court on 07.05.2011. Since the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise, the writ petitioner shall be entitled to take the refund of the said amount. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:17.08.2011 kdl