Ila Biswas vs State of West Bengal & Ors

Amrita Sinha, J

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be taken on record.

The petitioner participated in a selection process for appointment of Anganwadi Workers in the ICDS project initiated in the year 2009. A list of

selected candidates was prepared by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bongaon, North 24-Parganas in the year 2012. The name of the petitioner appeared

in the said list of selected candidates. The selection process was, however, cancelled by a subsequently formed Selection Committee.

The same was challenged by some candidates whose name appeared in the aforesaid list of selected candidates by filing a writ petition being W.P.

21217 (W) of 2012 which stood dismissed by an order dated 5th December, 2012.

An appeal was preferred and the said appeal being MAT 2010 of 2012 was allowed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court by order dated

21st March, 2014 wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench directed the respondent authorities to take necessary steps upon considering the

recommendation of the earlier Selection Committee.

The petitioner submits that even though there is a specific order of this Court for considering the earlier recommendation the same has not been

complied. On the contrary, the respondents have taken steps for publishing a fresh advertisement for selection of fresh candidates.

The petitioner’s grievance is that since her name appeared in the earlier list of selected candidates, steps should be taken for engaging her as

Anganwadi Worker.

The petitioner raised her grievance by way of a representation before the respondent authorities by a letter dated 27th January, 2020.

The petitioner prays for consideration of her representation.

The learned advocate appearing for the State respondents submits that the list of eligible candidates which the petitioner is relying, was the initial list

and thereafter the Selection Committee took interview of the candidates from the said list and the petitioner was unsuccessful. Accordingly, her name

did not appear in the final list of selected candidates.

It has been submitted that since the list relied upon by the petitioner is not the list that was recommended by the Selection Committee, the petitioner is

not entitled to any relief. Moreover the final panel which was prepared expired long ago and accordingly there is no question of reviving the same.

As it appears that the petitioner has already raised her grievance by way of a representation before the respondent authorities which is pending

consideration, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent No.3 being the District Programme Officer, Integrated Child Development

Service Scheme to consider the representation made by the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of

communication of a copy of this order and pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a fortnight thereafter.

It is made clear, that this court has not gone into the merits of the case and all points are left open to be decided by the said respondent at the time of

consideration of the prayer of the petitioner.

W.P. 2316 (W) of 2020 is disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.