CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Smt. Kiran Pathak vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 24 November 2010 · Citation: (2010) 11 UK CK 0103

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K. Bist, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 1090 of 2010
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 316 words

V.K. Bist, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

The Petitioner, who comes in the category of Below Poverty Line, applied for the post of Aaganbari Karyakarti in Aaganbari Center Jyoli, Block Bhimtal District Nainital. She submitted her application under the category of deserted/abandoned women. The Petitioner also submitted all the necessary documents required by the Respondents under the advertisement. In the month of October, 2010, the Respondents prepared a tentative select list in which the Respondent No. 5 was selected as Aaganbari Karyakarti ignoring the claim of the Petitioner.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that as per the Government Orders dated 24.02.2009 and 03.09.2009, the Petitioner alone could be considered for the post of Aaganbari Karyakarti and the selection of the Respondent No. 5 is illegal. He further submitted 2 that the Petitioner has already submitted a representation before the District Programme Officer, Child Development, Nainital on 08.10.2010, but no decision has been taken on the said representation till date. He prayed that the direction be issued to the District Programme Officer, Child Development, Nainital to decide the representation of the Petitioner in light of the aforesaid Government Orders.

4.

Prayer made by the Petitioner has not been opposed by the learned Standing Counsel for the State.

5.

Since selection of the Respondent No. 5 is under challenge in the present writ petition and no notice is being issued to her, the Court without going into the merits of the case directs the Respondent No. 3 i.e. District Programme Officer, Child Development, Nainital to decide the representation of the Petitioner dated 08.10.2010, in accordance with law and also by providing full opportunity to all concerned, within a period of three weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

6.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Misc. application No. 9819 of 2010 also stands disposed of.