Smt. Mamta Devi & another vs State of Uttarakhand and others

V.K. BIST J.

Present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

“I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 30.05.2018 (Annexure No.04 to the Writ Petition)

passed by the Child Development Project Office/RespondentNo.4, Agustyamuni,

II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities not to dispense with the services of the

petitioners on the post of Anganbari Karyakarti, Jhatgarh and Anganbari Sahayika, Jhatgarh, Village Sillabaman Gaon Block Agustyamuni, District

Rudraprayag.â€​

Case of the petitioners is that petitioner no.1 is working as Anganbari Karyakarti in Anganbari Kendra Jhatgarh, P.O. Agustyamuni and petitioner

no.2 is working as Anganbari Sahayika in Anganbari Kendra Jhatgarh P.O. Agustyamuni, District Rudraprayag. An advertisement was issued for

filling up several posts including the post of Anganbari Karyakarti and Anganbari Sahayika in District Rudraprayag. Petitioners being eligible applied

for the same and submitted their application forms. Petitioners declared successful in the said process of appointment. Thereafter Smt. Raj Kumari

Devi, who had also participated in the said process of selection, after being declared unsuccessful approached this Court challenging the said selection

process by filing Writ Petition No.1414 of 2013 before this Court in which this Court passed the following order:

“Accordingly writ petition is disposed of with direction to the competent authority to decide the representation/objection of the petitioner, by passing

a speaking/detailed order, within a period of four weeks from todayâ€​.

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that at that time post was of general category. There petitioners are working as Anganbari

Karyakarti since 2012-13 respectively. It is submitted that suddenly an order was passed by respondent no.4 giving one month’s notice to the

petitioners for cancelling their appointment order. In the notice, it is stated that since the area provision of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe was

more than 40%, therefore, that post should have been reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate. It is submitted that at the time, when post was filled,

the advertisement itself earmarked for filling up the category candidate, therefore, after 5-6 years, the same cannot be distributed.

It is submitted that order has been passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is also submitted that petitioners filed reply as

well as representation before the Child Development Project, Agustyamuni Rudraprayag. He confined his prayer that direction be issued for deciding

their representation.

Learned Deputy Advocate General submitted that prayer made by the petitioners can be allowed and the representation will be decided in

accordance with law.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, I dispose of the writ petition by permitting the petitioners to file fresh representation

along with certified copy of this order. Such representation be filed within a period of two weeks from today. In case same is filed within two weeks,

the respondent no.3 shall positively take decision on the representation of the petitioners within a period of two weeks thereafter. Petitioners are

permitted to continue till decision on the representation of the petitioners is taken. It is made clear that order dated 30.05.2016 is not quashed by this

Court. The authority will pass further order after hearing the petitioners and also the private respondent. In case representation is not filed within two

weeks, the authority concerned need not to pass any order.