Kali Khatun v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

16.09.2022 Sl. No.47(DL) srm W.P.A. No. 18676 of 2021 Kali Khatun Vs.

The State of West Bengal & ors.

Mr. Saibal Acharya, Mr. Bidyut Baran Biswas, Mr. Ranjit Kumar Rath ....for the Petitioner.

Mr. Jahar Lad De ...for the State-respondents.

The petitioner alleges that she was given an engagement letter on August 6, 2007 and was directed to join on or before August 8, 2007 in the office of the Child Development Project Officer, Rampurhat-I ICDS Project, Birbhum. According to the petitioner, she was stopped from entering the office, seven days from her joining. The Child Development Project Officer, RampurhatI ICDS Project informed the District Magistrate, Birbhum, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Rampurhat Sub-Division, Birbhum and the Block Development Officer, Rampurhat-I Development Block, Birbhum that the petitioner did not join the office within the due date. The petitioner also did not communicate anything in this behalf. Accordingly, the appointment of the petitioner was cancelled.

The petitioner has written a letter to the Child Development Project Officer, Rampurhat-I ICDS Project for withdrawal of the aforementioned memo for various reasons. One such reason is that the petitioner was not allowed to join, although she went to the office for seven days.

The correctness of the submissions of the petitioner cannot be accepted as the writ petition does not disclose any material in support of such claim. It also appears that the petitioner had kept silent for 14 years and thereafter the learned Advocate of the petitioner submitted a demand of justice before the authorities. In answer to the demand of justice, the Child Development Project Officer, RampurhatI ICDS Project intimated the reason as to why the petitioner's appointment had been cancelled. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner had ever approached the authorities with her allegation of being wrongfully prevented from attending her duty. Under such circumstances, the Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned. However, in future, if there is a fresh recruitment of Anganwadi Helper, the petitioner may participate in the process, provided she is otherwise eligible in accordance with the rules, and does not cross the age limit.

The writ petition is, thus, disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Parties are to act on the basis of the server copy of this order.

(Shampa Sarkar, J.)