IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 1819 of 2007 Between: Nallabothula Audi Lakshmi @ Gadirala Audi Lakshmi, W/o. Nallabothula Prasad, R/o. Thirumalapuram Village, Udayagiri Mandal, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 District Selection Committee of Anganwadi Workers, Nellore District, Rep. by Chairman, District Collector, Nellore. 2 I.C.D.S. Project Director, Women Development & Child Welfare Department District Committee of Anganwadi Workers, Nellore. 3 B. Saraswathi, W/o. Naga Subbareddy, R/o. Saisettypalle Village, Porumamilla Mandal, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent 1 and 2 in selecting or appointing the 3rd respondent as Anganwadi worker for Thirumalapuram Main Center, with in the operations of I.C.D.S. Project, Udayagiri, Nellore District as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and in violation of Articles 14, 15 of Constitution of India and guidelines relating to the appointment of Anganwadi Workers and Consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner in the said post duly setting aside the appointment or selection of the 3rd respondent and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.VENKATA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a Mandamus to declare the action of respondents 1 and 2 in appointing the 3rd respondent as Anganwadi worker of Thirumalapurm Main Center, within the operations of ICDS Project, Udayagiri, Nellore District, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner in the said post duly setting aside the appointment of the 3rd respondent. It appears that in pursuance of an advertisement dated 5.5.2006 for ﬁlling up the vacancy of Anganwadi worker of Tirumalapuram Village, Udayagiri Mandal, Nellore District, the petitioner, the 3rd respondent and others have submitted their applications. The petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent were subjected to interview and selection process. Ultimately, the 3rd respondent was declared as selected and she was appointed as Anganwadi worker. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is a native of Tirumalapuram Village, but her case was not considered, whereas though the 3rd respondent is not a native of Tirumalapuram Village, her case was considered. According to the petitioner, the 3rd respondent is a native of Saisetty palle, Porumamilla Mandal, Kadapa District, therefore, she could not have claimed appointment as Anganwadi worker of Tirumalapuram Village. In this regard, the petitioner produced a certiﬁcate purported to have been issued by the Panchayat Secretary, Tirumalapuram Village, stating that 3rd respondent-Saraswathi, wife of Velicherla Naga Subbareddy, is not enlisted as a voter in the village, and she is not a resident of the said village and that the certiﬁcate was issued to the best of his knowledge. The said certiﬁcate does not reveal that any enquiry has been conducted as to the nativity of the 3rd respondent herein. Apart from this, the case of the petitioner was also rejected on the ground that she was below 21 years at the time of submitting her application. The respondents ﬁled counter denying all the allegations made by the petitioner. It is stated that as per the nativity certificate dated 31.1.2006, issued by the Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Tirumalapuram Village, Udayagiri Mandal, Nellore District, which was produced by the 3rd respondent that the 3rd respondent is a native of Tirumalapuram Village and accordingly, call letter was sent to her, she attended the interview and was selected by the selection committee. The xerox copy of the nativity certiﬁcate is also produced along with the counter. The nativity certiﬁcate produced by the respondents, relating to the 3rd respondent, is in proper form, bearing seal, signature and ﬁle number etc., whereas the certiﬁcate produced by the petitioner has neither ﬁle number, seal nor date of issuance. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the 3rd respondent is not a native of Tirumalapuram Village, cannot be countenanced. Apart from that, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner was below 21 years at the time of submitting her application. The requirement for appointment to the post of Anganwadi worker is that one should be within the age limit of 21 to and 45 years. This criteria is not satisﬁed by the petitioner. No interference is called for by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. __________ 25-09-2008 rkk