Smt. Meena Devi vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Hon''ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)

Heard Ms. Sangeeta Miyan, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.

The Petitioner was a candidate for an "Anganbari Worker" for Anganbari Centre Sainji, Post Office Campati, Tehsil Dhanolti, district Tehri Garhwal. She was not selected instead of her, Respondent No. 5 has been selected. According to the Petitioner, the selection has been made in violation of the settled principle of law on the subject.

The matter pertaining to selection and appointment of an "Anganbari Karyakatri", is primarily governed by government order dated 24th February 2009. It is provided in the said government order that once there is a complaint on a selection, the matter must be referred to the appellate authority (Constituted under the Government Order dated 24th February 2009). The body of the Appellate Authority constituted is as follows:

Chief Development Officer- Chairman

A person nominated by the District Magistrate, who must be at least Class-II Officer, and,

District Programme Officer, who will be the member Secretary of this appellate body.

This apparently has not been done in the case of the Petitioner, therefore, the District Programme Officer are directed to refer the matter to the appellate authority, who shall hear the Petitioner as well as Respondent No. 5 and thereafter an appropriate order be passed.

It is made clear that the appellate authority shall look into the matter and take a decision as expeditiously as possible, but definitely within a period of six weeks from the date when the matter is referred to the appellate authority. The said authority shall pass an order after hearing all the concerned parties.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of finally.

No order as to costs.