Ch. Swapna v. The State Of Telangana ,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.22841 OF 2018 Dated:05.07.2018 Between:

Smt. Ch. Swapna, W/o. P. Dharmapal, Aged about years, Occ; Unemployee, R/o. Gundagaon Village, Bhainsa Mandal, Nirmal District .. Petitioner And The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary (Women and Child Welfare), Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.22841 OF 2018 ORDER:

Heard.

2.

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: "... to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner as Local candidate for Gundegaon for the post of Anganwadi Teacher, Nirmal District, Telangana State and consequently direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dt.15.11.2017 and 20.11.2017 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to contend that a non-local candidate is appointed as Anganwadi Teacher ignoring the petitioner. However, material placed on record does not exactly disclose as to how the selected candidate, impleaded as respondent No.6, is non-local of the village. The representation submitted by the petitioner does not disclose the details as to how the petitioner is alleging that the 6th respondent is not a local candidate. It is further noticed that the representation/complaint, dated 27.01.2018, was addressed to the Mandal Revenue Officer, Gundagaon, whereas the selecting authority is the Project Director. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to Votor Identity Card and the Electoral List, sought to contend that Electoral List does not contain the name of the village and Votor Identity Card reflects the name of the 6th respondent and describes the father name as Prakash, whereas the petitioner claims that

said Prakash is the husband of the 6th respondent. It is thus seen that there is no clarity as to what the petitioner sought to contend. Therefore, no relief as sought for by the petitioner can be granted when improper pleadings are alleged. This Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition.

5.

Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to make a detailed representation to the Project Director, the 3rd respondent, ventilating her grievance on the alleged wrong selection of a non-local candidate as Anganwadi Teacher. It is needless to observe that if a representation is made with all the particulars supported by documents, the competent authority shall consider the same and take appropriate decision within a period of eight weeks thereafter. If the competent authority is of the prima facie opinion that what is alleged by the petitioner merits consideration, he shall put the 6th respondent on notice and call upon her to explain the basis for claiming the residence status of the village. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

____________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J Date:05.07.2018 KH