N Prameela v. Child Development Project Officer

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.37549 OF 2013 ORDER:

The petitioners claim that they belong to Scheduled Caste community and residents of Snehalatanagar Colony, Somandipalli and Challapalli Village of Somandipalli Mandal, Anantapur District respectively. Pursuant to the advertisement made on 12.01.2011 notifying the vacancies for Anganwadi Workers in respect of the above villages, the petitioners applied for the posts with requisite documents. Interviews were held on 07.03.2013 and 08.03.2013 respectively. Though letters of appointment were given in favour of the petitioners on 27.04.2013, and as they were not allowed to join duty on 01.05.2013, the present writ petition was filed.

2. This Court by order dated 30.01.2014 directed the respondents not to make fresh appointment to the posts of Anganwadi Workers in respect of the above villages.

3. After passing the said order, W.P.M.P.No.20159 of 2016 was filed seeking impleadment of respondent Nos.4 and 5, who claimed that they got more marks than the petitioners and that application was ordered.

4. As per the counter affidavit of the impleaded respondents, they also applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker pursuant to the advertisement published on 12.01.2011 and attended the interview on the dates mentioned above.

However, when complaints were received by the District Collector, Anantapur, he appointed Additional Joint Collector, Anantapur to enquire into the matter and submit a report.

Accordingly, the Additional Joint Collector, Anantapur submitted a report on 21.08.2013 and it clearly revealed that the petitioners got lesser marks than other candidates. One of the

impleaded respondents filed a complaint before the Hon'ble Lokayukta for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh for appointing her as Anganwadi Worker and the Project Director, District Women and Child Development Agency, Anantapuram was asked to submit a report. He accordingly submitted a report on 06.07.2015. In the said report, it was stated that the second petitioner got lesser marks than respondent No.4 and because of clerical mistake it was shown that A.Sivamma was selected. Similarly in the case of the first petitioner also it was stated that she got lesser marks than respondent No.5.

5. No counter affidavit is filed by the official respondents.

6. However, respondent Nos.4 and 5 along with the counter affidavit filed a copy of the report submitted by the Additional Joint Collector, Anantapur on 21.08.2013 to the District Collector, according to which, respondent No.4 got 34.80 marks whereas second petitioner got 31.92 marks and respondent No.5 got 40 marks whereas the first petitioner got 35.95 marks. The said report was submitted after due enquiry.

7. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed and respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to take further steps pursuant to the dismissal of the writ petition. No costs.

8. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

______________________________ A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: 18.08.2016 Ivd