Smt.Laxmavva Ninganagouda Patil vs The Director
2023 Latest Caselaw 787 Kant

                           -1-




                                   WP NO.100542 OF 2019


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                          BEFORE
          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
       WRIT PETITION NO.100542 OF 2019 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:

1.   SMT.LAXMAVVA NINGANAGOUDA PATIL
     AGE: 30 YEARS,
     OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: BANNIKOPPA,
     POST: BANNUR,
     TQ: SHIGGAON,
     DIST: HAVERI.

                                           ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI S.B. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   THE DIRECTOR
     DEPT. OF WOMEN AND
     CHILD DEVELOPMENT,
     M.S. BUILDING,
     BENGALURU.

2.   THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER and
     THE PRESIDENT
     COMMITTEE FOR APPOINTMENT OF
     ANGANAWADI WORKER, HAVERI.

3.   THE CEO
     COMMITTEE FOR APPOINTMENT OF
     ANGANAWADI WORKER,
     HAVERI.
                           -2-




                                  WP NO.100542 OF 2019


4.   THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
     and MEMBER SECRETARY,
     COMMITTEE FOR APPOINTMENT OF
     ANGANAWADI WORKER, SHIGGAON,
     DIST: HAVERI.

5.   THE TALUQA SOCILAL WELFARE OFFICER and
     MEMBER, COMMITTEE FOR
     APPOINTMENT OF ANGANAWADI WORKER,
     SHIGGAON,
     DIST: HAVERI.

6.   THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
     DEPT. OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT,
     and MEMBER, COMMITTEE FOR
     APPOINTMENT OF ANGANAWADI WORKER,
     HAVERI.

7.   MANJULA D/O BASAVANNEPPA KOPPAD
     AGE: MAJOR,
     OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: BANNIKOPPA
     POST: BANNUR, TQ: SHIGGAON,
     DIST: HAVERI-581205.

8.   RUDRAVVA
     D/O VEERANAGOUDA TEMBADAMANI,
     AGE: 30 YEARS,
     OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: BANNIKOPPA,
     POST: BANNUR, TQ: SHIGGAON,
     DIST: HAVERI-581205.

                                        ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R6;
 SRI BASAVARAJ S. SATTANNAVAR, ADVOCTE FORR R8;
 R7 SERVED)
                                   -3-




                                             WP NO.100542 OF 2019


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE SELECT LIST DATED:12.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO.4 AND 6 AT ANNEXURE-"A" BY APPOINTING
THE RESPONDENT NO.8 TO THE POST OF ANGANWADI
WORKER    AT  BANNIKOPPA    POST   BANNUR    VILLAGE,
TQ:SHIGGAON DIST:HAVERI; AND ETC.
     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                            ORDER

In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the Select

list of the Anganawadi workers dated 12th December, 2018

passed by respondent No.6 Annexure-A whereby the petitioner

has challenged the appointment of respondent No.8 to the post

of Anganawadi worker at Bannikoppa village Shiggaon Taluk,

Haveri District.

2. The relevant facts for adjudication of this writ petition

are that the respondent-authorities invited application for

appointment of Anganawadi worker to various Anganawadi

Centres including Bannikoppa Centre of Shiggaon Taluk.

Pursuant to same, petitioner and respondents 7 and 8 have

made applications. The respondent-authorities, after

considering the same, issued the provisional selection list on

07th July, 2018 (Annexure-H), whereby appointed the petitioner

to the post of Anganawadi Worker at Bannikoppa Anganawadi

WP NO.100542 OF 2019

Centre. Thereafter, respondents 7 and 8 herein have filed

objection to the provisional selection list and the respondent-

authorities having considered the objection filed by respondents

7 and 8 herein and the relevant documents and issued the final

section list dated 12th December, 2018 appointing the

respondent No.8 herein as Anganawadi worker of Bannikoppa

Anganawadi Centre. Feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioner

has presented this writ petition.

3. Heard Sri S.B. Doddagoudar, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner; Sri Shivaprabhu S. Hiremath,

learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent-State

and Sri Basavaraj S. Sattannavar, learned Counsel appearing

for respondent No.8.

4. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner that the petitioner has filed the death certificate

of her husband to the respondent-authorities before

consideration of the objection made by respondents 7 and 8

herein and therefore, rejecting the application made by the

petitioner for appointment as Anganawadi worker is incorrect

and to buttress his arguments he relied upon the judgment of

WP NO.100542 OF 2019

this Court in the case of SMT. LAXMIBAI v. THE STATE OF

KRANTAKA AND OTHERS made in Writ petition No.202744 of

2016 disposed of on 20th June, 2019 and argued that

appointment of respondent No.8 is to be quashed by

considering the case of the petitioner for the said post.

5. Per conrtra, Sri Basavaraj S. Sattannavar, learned

Counsel appearing for respondent No.8, submitted that

respondent No.8 is working as Anganawadi worker at

Bannikoppa Centre for more than two and a half years and

therefore, interfering at this stage is not correct. He further

contended that the petitioner herein has not annexed the copy

of the death certificate of her husband at the time of making

the application pursuant to Notification issued by respondent-

authorities and therefore, sought to justify the appointment of

the respondent No.8.

6. Sri Shivaprabhu S. Hiremath, learned Additional

Government Advocate sought to justify the appointment of

respondent No.8 to the post of Anganawadi worker at

Bannikoppa Centre.

WP NO.100542 OF 2019

7. In the light of the submission made by the learned

counsel appearing for the parties it is not in dispute that the

petitioner is a widow and her husband died on 02nd December,

2015 (Annexure-C1). It is also not in dispute that the

petitioner has the benefit of widow pension issued by the

Government. The core question to be answered in this writ

petition is whether the respondent-authorities are justified in

appointing the respondent No.8 to the post of Anganawadi

worker at the cost of petitioner. In this aspect careful

examination of Annexure-X dated 07th July, 2018 would

indicate that the petitioner herein has enclosed the copy of the

death certificate of her husband much before the consideration

of the objection made by respondents 7 and 8 herein. In this

regard, perusal of provisional section list dated 07th July, 2018

Annexure-H makes it clear that, objection if any, has to be

considered by 13th July, 2018, however, as the petitioner has

produced the copy of the death certificate of her husband

before 07th July, 2018 itself, I find force in the submission of

the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. I have also

carefully considered the observation mad by this Court in the

aforementioned writ petition wherein, in an identical case, this

WP NO.100542 OF 2019

Court, has deliberated the process of selection of Anganawadi

worker and accordingly quashed the appointment of the

Anganawadi worker in the said writ petition and in that view of

the matter, following the observation made by this Court in the

aforementioned writ petition, I am of the view that the

petitioner herein has made out a case for interference and

accordingly, selection list dated 12th December, 2018

Annexure-A issued by the respondent-authorities appointing

respondent No.8 is illegal and contrary to law and accordingly

appoint of respondent No.8 is quashed. In that view of the

matter, respondent-authorities are directed to consider the

case of the petitioner and take decision in the matter within an

outer limit of one week from the date of receipt of certified

copy of this order and the respondent-authorities must also

ensure that children in the said Anganawadi Centre should not

be disturbed in view of quashing the appointment of

respondent No.8.

Sd/-

JUDGE

LNN