IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 13104 of 1999 Between: 1 Kaparapu Sita Rama Laxmi, W/o Late Baburao, R/o Chinapachila Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 2 Nakka Leela Venkata Ratnam, W/o Siva, R/o Medivada Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 3 Mandapaka Nagamani, W/o Apparao, R/o Medivada Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 4 Penki Jaya, W/o Nooka Raju, R/o Medivada Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 2 The Project Director, I.C.D.S., Visakhapatnam. 3 Project Officer, I.C.D.S., Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, 4 Dwarapudi Maheswari, W/o. Satyarao, Hindu, R/o. Chinapachila Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 5 Pitta Mahalaxmi, W/o. Siva Peddi Naidu, Hindu, R/o. Medivada Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, 6 Dadi Jaggarao, W/o. Apparao, Hindu, R/o. Medivada Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 7 Gadamala Rajya Lakshmi, W/o Ramu, Hindu, R/o. Medivada Village, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue any Writ, Order or direction particularly a Writ in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring the the selection process selecting Anganwadi Workers as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to G.O.Ms.No. 48, dated 28-7- 1998 and consequently direct the selection of the said post strictly interms of the procedurect contemplatedk under G.O.Ms.No. 48, dated 28-7-1998 by duly considering the cases of the petitioners and to pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem ﬁt just and necessary in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.SUBBAIAH SASTRY The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.13104 OF 1999 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the selection process adopted by the respondent-authorities for selecting Anganwadi workers was arbitrary, illegal and contrary to G.O.Ms.No.48 dated 28.07.1998 and consequently seeking a direction to duly consider the cases of the petitioners strictly in accordance with the procedure contemplated in the said G.O. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Fisheries appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 to 7. As per the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the writ petition, the petitioner No.1 claims to have applied for the post of Anganwadi worker in Chinapanchili village while the petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are said to have applied for the posts of Anganwadi workers in Mediwada village. The complaint of the petitioners was that the respondents 4 to 7 were appointed as Anganwadi workers overlooking their case and the selection of the respondents 4 to 7 was in violation of the G.O. Ms.No.48 dated 28.07.1998 as the selection committee was not constituted in accordance with the provisions thereof. This Court by an order dated 06.08.1999 directed that any appointment made would be subject to the result of the writ petition. The Project Oﬃcer, ICDS, Ravikamatham Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, the third respondent in the writ petition, ﬁled a counter aﬃdavit stating to the eﬀect that the petitioner No.1, in spite of being appointed to the post of Anganwadi worker in Chinapanchili village along with others, did not choose to join the said post. With regard to petitioner No.3, it is stated that she did not even apply for the post of Anganwadi worker at Mediwada village while the petitioner No.4 is said to be ineligible for appointment as she studied only upto 8th class. It is further stated that the selection was made strictly in accordance with the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.48 dated 28.07.1998 and the appointments of respondents 4 to 7 were lawful and valid. The petitioners did not choose to file a reply to the above counter. In the light of the uncontroverted facts as brought out by the counter aﬃdavit, the petitioner No.1, in spite of her appointment, did not choose to join, while petitioner No.3 did not even apply for the post. It is also stated that the petitioner No.4 was unqualiﬁed. The counter aﬃdavit also brings forth the fact that the selections were made strictly in accordance with the norms as laid down in G.O.Ms.No.48 dated 28.07.1998. This aspect remains unrebutted as the petitioners did not choose to file a reply. In the light of the above stated facts and circumstances, it is clear that there are no merits in the case put forth by the petitioners in the writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ P.V.SANJAY KUMAR, J. 28th August, 2008. VGSR