Amina Khatun & ORS v. State Of West Bengal & ORS
22.04.2025 Court No. 25 D.Hira WPA 7308 of 2016 Amina Khatun & Ors.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Saibal Acharyya, Mr. Pradip Paul.
... for the petitioners
1. Leave is granted for making correction in the prayer portion of the writ petition as regards the date of interview in the selection process.
2. Three petitioners are the incumbents who participated in the selection process for appointment of Anganwadi workers in Ratua-I Block, District Malda.
3. An interview was held on January 2, 2011. However, no result of the selection process in the form of a panel of successful candidates, has ever been published since thereafter.
4. Hence, the writ petitioners are aggrieved.
5. Mr. Saibal Acharyya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, has pointed out from the documents annexed with the writ petition that an application filed by the petitioners under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 for disclosure of the result of the selection process and panel, dated November 30, 2015 has also gone in vain, in so far as the respondent authority has never replied or furnished any information pursuant to the said application.
6. None appears for the State respondent, in spite of service of notice. Hence, the matter is taken up for
final adjudication in absence of the respondent authorities.
7. A recruitment process for Anganwadi workers was initiated by publication of notification by the Child Development Project Officer, Ratua-I, Integrated Child Development Scheme Project, dated December 10, 2009.
8. The present petitioners were the incumbents amongst others who have taken part in the recruitment process. They have taken part in the interview process which was held on January 2, 2011.
Allegedly, since thereafter, no panel has been published or appointment has been made in the post of Anganwadi worker in the said project office, pursuant to the selection process as above.
9. Hence, the petitioners seek that the respondent be directed to immediately publish the panel as prepared after completion of the selection process as above. 10.
Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the Court finds it proper to dispose of the present writ petition by directing the respondent no. 7/ the Child Development Project Officer, Ratua-I, Integrated Child Development Scheme Project, to consider the present writ application by the petitioners as their representation before it and dispose of the same by dint of a reasoned order, after affording reasonable and sufficient opportunity to the petitioners for hearing within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of copy of this order.
Let a copy of the writ petition be also submitted before the said Authority, along with the copy of this order. 11.
Needless is to mention that in case the said respondent finds the final result of the selection procedure as above is yet to be published in the form of a panel of the successful candidates, he shall take necessary steps to immediately publish such panel. 12.
It is further mentioned that in case of the petitioners' name finds place in the said panel, necessary further steps shall immediately be taken for their appointment, by the said respondent.
13.
Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed to have been denied by the respondents including the private respondents.
14.
With the above observations and directions, the writ petition being No WPA 7308 of 2016 is disposed of, along with the pending applications, if any. 15.
Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.)