[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Shahida Parveen vs Ut Of J&K & Ors on 2 February, 2026
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Sanjay Dhar
Serial No. 67
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Case:- WP(C) No.2167/2025
Shahida Parveen
.....Petitioner(s)
Through: Ms. Surinder Kour, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Manpreet Kour, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K & Ors.
.....Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate vice
Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
Ms. Palvi Sharma, Advocate vice
Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG
Mr. Rajiv K. Sharma, Advocate for R-10.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
(02.02.2026)
1. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition,
has challenged the order dated 22.07.2025, passed by
the Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri, whereby respondent
No.6 has been directed to issue a fresh advertisement
notice for the post of Sahayikas (Anganwari Helper) for
Anganwari Centre Leeran Chilla Ward No.4, Tehsil
Darhal. The petitioner has also sought a direction upon
the respondents not to disengage her from the post of
Sahayika (Anganwari Helper) for Anganwari Centre
Leeran Chilla Ward No.4 and to allow her to perform her
duties.
2. Heard and considered.
3. It appears that pursuant to her participation in the
selection process, the petitioner was engaged as
Anganwari Helper/ Sahayika for Anganwari Centre
Leeran Chilla Ward No.4 in terms of order No.20 of
2023 dated 04.08.2023. According to the petitioner,
she started functioning as Anganwari Helper/ Sahayika
in the aforesaid Centre but respondent No.10 filed an
appeal against final selection list dated 02.08.2023 in
terms whereof the petitioner was selected.
4. The Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri, while deciding the
appeal, is stated to have passed the impugned order
dated 22.07.2025, whereby the selection list dated
02.08.2023 has been set aside and the Programme
Officer, ICDS Rajouri has been directed to issue a fresh
advertisement/notification for selection to the post of
Sahayika (Anganwari Helper) for Anganwari Centre
Leeran Chilla Ward No.4, after following due process.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.10 has submitted
that the said respondent does not have any objection if
the impugned order passed by the Deputy
Commissioner, Rajouri is set aside and the matter is
decided afresh by the said authority on its own merits.
In fact, learned counsel for respondent No.10 has
further submitted that he has filed an application with
the Registry of this Court making a similar prayer.
6. If we have a look at the impugned order passed by the
Deputy Commissioner on 22.07.2025, it appears that
the said order is cryptic in nature. The operative portion
of the said order is reproduced as under:
"After hearing counsel for both the parties at
lengthy and going through the record placed
across file, this Court is of the considered opinion
that there is no convincing reason to accept the
selection list of Sahayikas (Anganwari Helper)
declared by Child Development Project Officer,
Poshan Darhal vide order No.DIP/J-677 dated
02.08.2023 for selection of Sahayikas (Anganwari
Helper).
Therefore, in view of the above, the selection
list of Sahayikas (Anganwari Helper) vide order
No.DIP/J-677 dated 02.08.2023 is hereby set
aside ab initio. PO, ICDS Rajouri is directed to
issue fresh advertisement notification for the post
of Sahayikas (Anganwari Helper) after following
the due procedure of law. Status Quo, if any,
issued by this court shall stand vacated. The file
be relegated to records after its due completion."
7. A perusal of the aforesaid order goes on to show that the
Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri has not assigned any
reasons, much less cogent reasons, for setting aside the
selection list dated 02.08.2023 while exercising his
appellate powers, as a quasi judicial authority. It was
incumbent upon respondent No.2 to record reasons for
his conclusion, which he has failed to do.
8. It is a settled law that an order passed by judicial or
quasi judicial authority, in the absence of the reasons,
becomes arbitrary exercise of power. The reasons are
heartbeat of any judicial or quasi judicial order and in
the absence of the reasons, such order becomes
unsustainable in law.
9. In the present case, as already indicated, respondent
No.2 has passed the impugned order without assigning
any reasons, as such, the same is liable to be set aside.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the
impugned order dated 22.07.2025 passed by Deputy
Commissioner, Rajouri is set aside and the matter is
remanded to the said authority with a direction to pass a
fresh order on the appeal filed by the respondent No.10
after hearing the petitioner as well as respondent No.10.
While passing the fresh order, the Deputy
Commissioner, Rajouri shall record his reasons for the
conclusion that may be arrived at by the said authority
without getting influenced by any observations made by
him in the impugned order.
11. The fresh decision in the matter shall be taken by
Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri most expeditiously,
preferably within a period of two months from the date a
copy of this order is made available to said authority. Till
the fresh decision is taken by the Deputy Commissioner,
the present status of the petition shall not be
distributed.
12. Disposed of.
(SANJAY DHAR)
JUDGE
JAMMU
02.02.2026
Sneha
