1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.1979/2007. : : Guddi Devi Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 18.3.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Govind Gupta for Mr. Ankur Rastogi for the petitioner. Mr. Zakir Hussain, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition with the prayer that respondents be directed to grant him appointment on the post of Worker in Anganbari Kendra at Govindpura with all consequential benefits. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner possess the qualification of Bachelor of Arts and also obtained training in Satat Shiksha Karyakarma at block level. She was appointed as Worker/Helper in Serve Shiksha Abhiyan at Balvari Kendra and worked as Mahila Prerika from 31.3.2003 to 30.4.2006, but that kendra was 2 closed down by the Government. The Deputy Secretary, Primary Education (Schemes) issued an order on 5.7.2006 in compliance of order dated 24.6.2006. Similar order was issued to Additional Director on 21.7.2006 to all District Education Officers that those who are already working as Worker/Helper/Mahila Prerika be absorbed in Anganbari Kendra. The newly established Anganbari Kendra is located at two kilometer from petitioner's village. Petitioner submitted application on 6.11.2006 to respondents for appointing her as a worker in newly established Anganbari Kendra in terms of aforesaid order, but she has not been given appointment. She made number of representations but no heed was paid. It is contended that respondent No.6, whose qualification is only VIII class and is residing three kilometers from newly established Anganbari Kendra and having no experience however was illegally selected for appointment. Respondent No.7, who has also acquired qualification of X class and residing three kilometers from newly established Anganbari Kendra and also having no experience, she too was illegally selected. 3. The respondents have contested the writ petition and in reply to writ petition have submitted that although it 3 was decided that Mahila Prerak working in Balvadi Centers should be given priority for appointment in Anganbari Kendra, but that order was subject to condition that such candidates should be having qualification prescribed for Anganbari Kendra and the candidates should be resident in the area of Anganbari Kendra; she must be married; she must be between the age of 21 to 45 years, and she must be a local resident and must be having academic qualification of secondary. The Gram Shabha, Govindpura in its meeting dated 14.12.2006 received two applications, one was of petitioner the other was of Smt. Maya Devi. The Gram Shabha unanimously passed resolution to appoint Smt. Maya Devi to the post of Anganbari Karyakarta, who belongs to backward community. Smt. Maya Devi is working on the post of Karyakarta as per condition that a candidate, who is selected as Karyakarta, should be local resident of village whereas petitioner is not local resident of village Govindpura and resident of Chitos, which is situated at the distance of 4 kilometers. For these reasons, petitioner has not been selected. This very fact has been recorded in minutes of meeting of Gram Shabha. 4 4. In view of clarifications made by respondents that selection of Smt. Maya Saini, respondent No.6 was unanimously made by Gram Shabha and she too has undergone training, she is local resident of that village whereas petitioner is resident of another village and since for all this time, she has been working, selection of respondent No.6 cannot be said to be vitiated by any reason. I do not see any reason for entertaining the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.103.