Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Nagari Prasanna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 445 AP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 445 AP
Judgement Date : 25 January, 2023

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Nagari Prasanna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 January, 2023
 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

                     WRIT PETITION No.59 OF 2016

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India for the following relief:-

"To issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings No.51/2015, 10.11.2015 of the Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project Udayagiri, S.P.S.R. Nellore District, wherein the 7th respondent was appointed as a Anganwadi worker of Devisettipalle (Vil), Seetharamapuram Mandal, S.P.S.R. Nellore District is arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, in violation of G.O.Ms.No.21, Women Development, Child Welfare & Disabled Welfare (ICDS) Department, dt.24.08.2007 and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order."

2. In pursuance of the notification dated 30.09.2015,

the petitioner herein along with the 7th respondent have applied

for the post of Anganwadi worker. The unofficial respondent was

appointed as Anganwadi worker. Aggrieved by the said

appointment, the present Writ Petition came to be filed on the

ground that the petitioner herein is a meritorious candidate and

the appointment of the unofficial respondent is contrary to

G.O.Ms.No.21, Women Development, Child Welfare and Disabled

Welfare (ICDS) Department dated 24.08.2007. It is further

averred in the affidavit that the 7th respondent, not having any

vote in Devisettipalle village, where the post of Anganwadi worker

was notified and she is not having ration card and she is not the

local married woman.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit

that the selection of the 7th respondent is in accordance with the

G.O.Ms.No.21 dated 24.08.2007, wherein the petitioner is not

selected and with an ulterior motive, the present Writ Petition is

filed and hence, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of

Karnataka and others v. Ameerbi and others 1. In the above said

judgment, Anganwadi workers filed an application under Section

(2007) 11 SCC 687

15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, before the

Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal and in one of such

applications being Nagarathna B.K. & Others v. The Secretary,

Social Welfare Dept. & Others (1992 K.S.L.J. 177), it is held that

the said application was not maintainable and the correctness of

the said decision came to be questioned and the said matter was

referred to a larger bench of the Tribunal and the Tribunal held

that the said application is maintainable opining that although

Anganwadi workers are paid honorarium, they hold civil post.

5. Aggrieved by the said order, the State of Karnataka

has filed S.L.P. before the Hon'ble Supreme Court it is held that

the post of an Anganwadi worker is not a civil post and their

appointment is not under Article 309 of the Constitution of India

and their appointment is under the scheme which is not a

permanent nature, although they might have continued for a

long time. The post of Anganwadi worker being an honorary

post, this Writ Petition cannot be filed either for challenging the

selection or contending that the petitioner should have been

appointed as better meritorious candidate. The Hon'ble Apex

Court held that the said post of Anganwadi worker does not

come under the purview of the civil post.

6. Hence, the petitioner herein has no right to challenge

the appointment of the 7th respondent herein. When the post is

not a civil post, in the sense not on employment, opportunity

created by the State itself, the action cannot be challenged on

the ground of violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution

of India.

7. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court

referred to supra, this Writ Petition fails and, accordingly, it is

dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ

Petition.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in

this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 25.01.2023 siva

+ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

WRIT PETITION No.59 OF 2016

Date: 25.01.2023

siva

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter