IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 443 of 2009 WRIT APPEAL(SR) NO : 150233 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated in WP No. 12065 of 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. Singanuri Sridevi ..... APPELLANTS AND 1. Smt. Md. Reshma .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : of 2009 WRIT APPEAL(SR) NO : 150233 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari ) Aggrieved by the common order, dated 16.10.2008 made in W.P. No. 12065 of 2008 and Batch, by a learned Single Judge of this court disposing the writ petitions with certain directions, the present Writ Appeal is filed by the appellants after seeking leave. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellants herein is that the appellants were selected to the post of Anganwadi Workers and Helpers, after due process of law and without making them party respondents to the Writ Petition, the writ petition was filed and the learned Single Judge of this Court by the order impugned herein has set aside the selections so made directing the official respondents to constitute a proper Selection Committee as required in terms of GO Ms. No. 28 dated 2.12.2004 and proceed with the selections. It was further directed by the learned Single Judge that if any of the writ petitioners are selected pursuant to the notifications dated 15.12.2007 and 18.12.2007, their selection would be subject to further selections to be conducted in pursuance of the impugned order and such of those candidates shall also be subjected to the selection process along with others. It is case of the appellants that they have undergone the selection process and in fact they were selected by the duly constituted Selection Committee and the writ petitioners i.e. Respondents 1 to 24 herein, without making the appellants as party respondents to the writ petition, behind their back have obtained the order projecting wrong facts and, as such, if they are not afforded an opportunity to put forth their case, they would be deprived of their employment. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 24 and the learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare. As can be seen from the record, the appellants herein have undergone the selection process and it is their claim that they were selected as Anganwadi Workers/Helpers. Be that is so, the fact remains that the appellants herein are not made party respondents to the writ petition. In such circumstances, without adverting to the merits or otherwise of the contentions raised herein, while setting aside the impugned order, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter back to the learned Single Judge for consideration afresh. It is needless to mention that the appellants herein shall be treated as respondents 28 to 162 in W.P. No. 12065 of 2008. Consequently, the Writ Appeal is allowed setting aside the impugned order and remanding the same to the learned Single Judge for disposal in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the parties. The Registry is directed to list the Writ Petition before the learned Single Judge having roster, on 20.04.2009. In the meanwhile, status quo as on today shall be maintained. No order as to cost. _____________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari _______________________ Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar March 26, 2009 MAS