Bhanita Kakati Roy v. The State of Assam and 4 Ors

ORDER Date : 21.03.2024

Heard Mr. A. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. D. Das Barman, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents no. 1 to 4. None has appeared for the respondent no. 5. The grievance raised in the present proceeding is with regard to the non consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment/promotion as an Anganwadi worker in No. 186 Anganwadi Centre under Bajali ICDS Project. The petitioner herein was engaged as an Anganwadi helper in the said centre on 27.09.2007. The Anganwadi worker engaged in the said centre on resigning from the post, the petitioner was allowed to look after the works of the Anganwadi worker in addition to her assigned works as an Anganwadi helper. The petitioner, accordingly, was expecting that the Page No.# 3/4 respondent authorities to promote her to the post of Anganwadi worker, considering the experience gathered by her against the post. However, the respondent authorities proceeded to issue an advertisement dated

12.11.2012 for filling up, amongst others, the post of Anganwadi worker as figuring in the said Anganwadi centre. The petitioner also filed her application in pursuance to such an appointment; however, it was the respondent no. 5, who came to be selected in pursuance to due process of selection. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present proceeding. The respondents by way of filing an affidavit in the matter have contended that the petitioner at the relevant point of time was not eligible for promotion to the post of Anganwadi worker inasmuch as she had not completed the requisite residency of 10 years of service as an Anganwadi helper inasmuch as, the petitioner had joined her services as an Anganwadi helper only in the year 2007. With regard to the selection held in pursuance to the advertisement dated 12.11.2012, it was contended that the same was so conducted, strictly, in accordance with the procedure mandated and the respondent no. 5 having been found to be most suitable on merits, the respondent no. 5 came to the appointed as the Anganwadi worker of the said centre. In view of the above position, the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present proceeding does not merit acceptance. However, Mr. A. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed before this Court to permit him to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty. Accordingly, in view of the above, the writ petition stands dismissed Page No.# 4/4 on withdrawal with a liberty granted to the petitioner to institute any further proceeding on a fresh cause of action arising in the matter. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010005792014 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/665/2014o BHANITAoKAKATIoROYo W/OoSRIoKAILASHoROY,oPATHSALAoTOWN,oP.S.oPATACHARKUCHI,oP.O.o PATHSALA,oW/NO.3,oDIST-oBARPETA,oPIN-781325 VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo4oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPRINCIPALoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o SOCIALoWELFAREoDEPARTMENT,oDISPUR,oGHY-6 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoSOCIALoWELFARE oGOVT.oOFoASSAM oUZANoBAZAR oGHY-1 3:THEoSELECTIONoCOMMITTEE oHEADEDoBYoITSoCHAIRMANoFORoSELECTIONoOFoANGANWADIoWORKDER OFoNO.186oANGANWADIoCENTRE oPATHSALA oBAJALIoICDSoPROJECT oBAJALI oDIST-oBARPETA 4:THEoCHILDoDEVELOPMENToPROJECToOFFICER oBAJALIoICDSoPROJECT oPATHSALA oBARPETA 5:DIPSIKHAoDAS oW/OoSRIoAMARJYOTIoDAS oW/NO.3 oPATHSALA Page No.# 2/4 DIST- BARPETA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.R K TALUKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : MR.R P GUPTA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR