The Selection Committee reconsidered the relevant facts in a meeting held on 04.06.2010 attended by five members of the Selection Committee including the Sub Collector, Khurda who had remanded the matter for reconsideration.
A liberty, however, was granted to the respondent number1 that as per Government guidelines, she may prefer an appeal before the Additional District Magistrate against the selection of the appellant.
The effect of the impugned order judgment is to allow the writ petition preferred by respondent number1 and as a result selection and appointment of the appellant stands set aside and instead respondent number1 has been appointed as Anganwadi Worker for the companycerned centre.
Learned companynsel for the appellant has taken us through the relevant orders and enquiry reports which show that even before the appellant was engaged, as soon as respondent number1 came to know that in the selection process appellant had secured highest marks and was likely to be engaged, she approached appellate higher authority respondent number3, the Sub Collector, Khurda.
In the meantime, respondent number1 had preferred a writ petition bearing W.P. C No.9300 of 2010 in which her simple grievance was that order of Sub Collector, Khurda dated 26.12.2009 was number being implemented.
The moot question to be answered in this appeal is whether the Division Bench should have allowed the writ appeal only on technicalities and on the basis of certain orders passed earlier when on facts there was numberambiguity that respondent number1 was number a resident of the companycerned centre and hence lacked the basic eligibility for engagement as Anganwadi Worker for the centre.
By order dated 26.12.2009, respondent number3 numbericed that appellants sister was engaged as Anganwadi Worker in another centre and, therefore, without waiting for the order of engagement, as appellate authority respondent number3 set aside the orders selecting the appellant and the matter was remanded back to the Child Development Project Officer respondent number4 to reconsider the case of the respondent number1 as per the Government guidelines.
She is aggrieved by the judgment under appeal dated 18.07.2011 whereby the Division Bench of Orissa High Court set aside the order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court dated 09.08.2010.
The writ petition was dismissed on 09.08.2010 on the ground that appellant had secured more marks in the selection and there was numberillegality in the selection process.
Respondent number1 challenged the decision of the Selection Committee dated 04.06.2010 directly through a writ petition bearing W.P. C No.11960 of 2010.
That writ petition was disposed of on 20.05.2010 with a direction to implement the order of Sub Collector within four weeks.
The appellant as well as respondent number1 applied in response to an advertisement dated 02.02.2009 for engagement as Anganwadi Worker for Urumukhi 3 Anganwadi Center, Bhushandpur, Tangi, Odisha.
SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J. Heard the parties.
Leave granted.
The respondent number1 did number prefer any appeal before the Additional District Magistrate or any other authority and instead preferred Writ Appeal No.430 of 2010 which was allowed on 18.07.2011 by the order under appeal.
