Karnataka High Court
Smt Nagamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 January, 2023
Bench: Alok Aradhe, S Vishwajith Shetty
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
W.A. NO.1240 OF 2021 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. NAGAMMA
W/O LATE MALLIKARJUNA
D/O BORAIAH
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/AT MARAMMANAHALLI, KONDLAHALLI POST
MOLAKALMURU TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTIRCT-577529.
... APPELLANT
(BY MR. JAGADEESH D.C. ADV.,)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND
CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND PHYSICALLY
HANDICAPPED AND SENIOR CITIZEN WELFARE
DEPARTMENT
REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
CHITRADURGA TOWN
AND DISTRICT-577501.
3. THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER
ZILLA PANCHAYATH
2
CHITRADURGA
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.
4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND
CHILD DEVELOPMENT , CHITRADURGA
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.
5. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PLANNING OFFICER
MOLAKALMURU TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577529.
6. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND MEMBER
DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND
CHILD DEVELOPMENT
ANGANAWADI WORKERS/ HELPER SELECTION
COMMITTEE, MOLAKALMURU-577529.
7. THE DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER
AND MEMBER DEPARTMENT OF
WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
ANGANAWADI WORKER / HELPER SELECTION
COMMITTEE, MOLAKALMURU-577529.
8. THE SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER
AND MEMBER, DEPARTMENT OF
WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
ANGANAWADI WORKER/HELPER SELECTION
COMMITTEE, MOLAKALMURU-577529.
9. SMT. CHANDRAMMA
W/O LATE BASAVARAJA @ BASANNA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/AT NO. 175, MARAMMANAHALLI
KONDLAHALII POST, MOLAKALMURU TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577529.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHY C, ADV., FOR C/R9
MR. B. RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R1 TO R8)
3
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE
WRIT APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY SET-ASIDE THE ORDER
OF LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, DATED 23/08/2021 PASSED
IN WP NO.12607/2020 (S-RES) AND CONSEQUENTLY
DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION NO.12607/2020 (S-RES) FILED
BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This intra Court appeal has been filed against an
order dated 23.08.2021 passed by the learned Single
Judge by which the writ petition preferred by the
respondent No.9 has been allowed and appointment of
the appellant to the post of Anganawadi Assistant has
been quashed. The official respondents have been
directed to consider the case of respondent No.9 for
appointment to the post of Anganawadi Assistant at
Marammanahalli Anganawadi Centre.
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly
stated are that by a notification dated 16.03.2020 the
Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga District invited
applications for filling up of the post of Anganawadi
Assistant in various Anganawadi Centres of
Chitradurga District. The appellant as well as the
respondent No.9 applied for the post of Anganawadi
Assistant at Marmanahalli Anganawadi Centre at
Molakalmuru Taluk, Chitradurga District. The
applications were invited online and the candidates
were required to upload the documents as indicated in
the notification inviting applications. Respondent
No.9 indicated preference being a widow and was
required to upload the death certificate of her
husband along with the application. Respondent No.9
admittedly is more meritorious candidate than the
appellant as she has secured 400 marks in 7th
standard whereas the appellant has secured 288
marks in 7th standard. Since respondent No.9 had
not uploaded the death certificate of her husband, the
candidature of respondent No.9 was rejected and an
order of appointment dated 08.09.2020 was issued by
which the appellant was appointed as Anganawadi
Assistant. The respondent No.9 challenged the
appointment of the appellant in a writ petition. The
learned Single Judge, by an order dated 23.08.2021,
quashed the appointment of appellant to the post of
Anganawadi Assistant and directed the official
respondents to consider the case of respondent No.9
for appointment of Anganawadi Assistant at
Marammanahalli Anganawadi Centre. In the
aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been
filed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted
that the learned Single Judge ought to have
appreciated that respondent No.9 did not annex the
requisite document namely certificate of death of her
husband along with her application and therefore, her
candidature was rightly rejected. It is further
submitted that the notification does not envisage
grant of opportunity for curing the defect in the
application. On the other hand, learned counsel for
the respondent No.9 has supported the order passed
by the learned Single Judge.
4. We have considered the submissions made on
both sides and have perused the record. It is not in
dispute that respondent No.9 is more meritorious
than the appellant as she has secured 400 marks in
7th standard whereas the appellant has secured 288
marks in 7th standard. The respondent No.9 had
applied under the category of widow but she had
failed to upload the death certificate of her husband.
The learned Single Judge has held that the defect in
the application of respondent No.9 was a curable
defect and therefore, she ought to have been given an
opportunity to furnish the said certificate. It has
further been held that a women at rural level with
qualification of 4th standard, cannot be accepted to
possess computer knowledge and therefore, the
respondent No.9 who was even otherwise an eligible
candidate and was more meritorious to be appointed
as Anganawadi Assistant, ought to have been given an
opportunity to furnish the document. In the peculiar
facts of the case and taking into account the fact that
respondent No.9 admittedly is more meritorious
candidate than the appellant, we are not inclined to
interfere with the order passed by the learned Single
Judge.
In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby
dismissed.
5. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending
interlocutory application does not survive for
consideration and is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
