Orissa High Court
Nirupama Pani vs State Of Odisha & Others ... Opposite ... on 15 April, 2025
Author: Sashikanta Mishra
Bench: Sashikanta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.5277 of 2025
(Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India)
Nirupama Pani ... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha & others ... Opposite Parties
Advocates appeared in the case through hybrid mode:
For Petitioner : Mr.Soubhagya Ku. Dash,
Advocate.
-versus-
For Opposite Parties : Mr. S.Behera, A.G.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
JUDGMENT
15.4.2025.
Sashikanta Mishra,J. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition
with the following prayer;
"In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, the petitioner most
respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court
may be pleased to issue a writ in the
nature of Mandamus directing the
opposite parties to consider the
petitioner's candidature for the post of
Anganwadi Helper at Jeerango Christian
Sahi Anganwadi Center in compliance
with the directions of this
Hon'ble Court and quash Fresh
Advertisement No. 143 dated
06.02.2025 so far Jeerango Christian
Sahi Anganwadi center is concerned as
being arbitrary, illegal, and violative of
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
India;
And Pass such other and further
orders as may be deemed just and
proper in the facts and circumstances of
the case."
2. The facts of the case are that an advertisement was
issued by the Child Development Project Officer
(C.D.P.O.), Rayagada (Opp. Party No.4) in the district
of Gajapati on 8.9.2024 inviting applications from
eligible candidates for selection and engagement as
Anganwadi Helper of different Anganwadi Centres. The
Petitioner submitted application for Jeerango Christian
Sahi Anganwadi Centre. She was the only candidate
for the said Centre. The result of selection for the other
Anganwadi Centres was issued on 24.10.2024, but in
so far as the Jeerango Christian Sahi Anganwadi
Centre is concerned, no such notification was issued.
The Petitioner submitted representation to the Sub-
Collector, Parlakhemundi, Gajapati (Opp. Party No.3)
in this regard. Since no action was taken, she
approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.31440/2024. By
order dated 02.1.2025, this Court disposed of the Writ
Petition granting liberty to the Petitioner to submit
another representation addressed to the Sub-Collector,
Parlakhemundi, which was directed to be disposed of
by passing a reasoned order within two weeks
thereafter. Subsequently, another advertisement was
issued on 6.2.2025 for different Anganwadi Centres
including Jeerango Christian Sahi Anganwadi Centre.
The Petitioner therefore, filed the present Writ Petition
with the prayer as quoted hereinbefore. During
pendency of the Writ Petition, the petitioner submitted
an application enclosing therewith copy of the letter
dtd.28.2.2025 of the C.D.P.O. informing that the
advertisement for Jeerango Christian Sahi Anganwadi
Centre has been cancelled.
3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the
State, it is, inter alia, stated that the Petitioner was the
single candidate for Jeerango Christian Sahi
Anganwadi Centre, but she does not belong to the
operational area of the said Centre. From the inquiry
conducted by the Lady Supervisor of Jeerango and
Marlaba Sectors on 6.11.2024 on the complaint of
villagers, who had objected to the candidature of the
Petitioner, it was found that the Petitioner was not
resident of the service area. Further, the villagers
vehemently objected to her candidature and other
villagers had signed on the inquiry report. Copy of
letter dtd.28.2.2025 issued by the Sub-Collector,
Parlakhemundi addressed to the CDPO is also
enclosed to the counter affidavit as Annexure-E/4,
wherein the reason for not accepting the candidature
of the Petitioner has been mentioned.
4. Heard Mr. S.K.Dash, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. S. Behera, learned Addl.
Government Advocate for the State.
5. Mr. Dash would argue that as per the guidelines,
the Petitioner is eligible for being considered for
engagement as Anganwadi Helper of the area even if
she is not a resident of the Centre area. There is no
dispute that the Petitioner is a resident of the said
village and therefore, she is entitled to be considered as
per the guidelines.
6. Mr. S. Behera, learned Addl. Government
Advocate, would argue that even if the candidature of
the Petitioner is concerned, the resident certificate
produced by her is 12 years old, which is contrary to
the terms of the advertisement.
7. Perusal of the guidelines issued on 15.3.2023 of
the Government relating to selection of Anganwadi
Helpers reveals that as per Clause-1(i), she must be a
lady of the locality and acceptable to be the Anganwadi
Worker. Thus, the place of residence has been broadly
indicated as 'locality'. Ordinarily, under the scheme of
things, it would refer to the operational area of the
Anganwadi Centre. The word 'locality' has not been
otherwise defined in the guidelines. Locality means (i) a
District or neighbourhood, (ii) the scene of an event
and (iii) the position of a thing. The word locally means
within or in terms of a particular area or the people
living in it. Understood thus, the term 'locality', in the
context of the guidelines, would obviously refer to the
area over which the Anganwadi Centre has
jurisdiction.
8. However, this is a case where admittedly there
was no candidate from the service area of the
Anganwadi Centre. The Petitioner admittedly is a
resident of the same village though not a resident of
the service area of the centre. The question is, can she
be treated as an eligible candidate? Had there been any
other candidate who is a resident of the service area,
obviously, the Petitioner could not have been held to be
eligible, but in the absence of any other candidate the
word 'locality' as used in the guidelines, in the
considered view of this Court, would receive an
expanded meaning in order to give effect to the object
of the guidelines. This interpretation would be in line
and having a reasonable nexus with the object sought
to be achieved by the guidelines, which is selecting a
person as Anganwadi Helper. If on the other hand, a
restrictive meaning is given to the word 'locality', it
would in the instant case, result in the post remaining
vacant for want of an eligible candidate. This would
obviously be contrary to the object of the guidelines
itself. In the letter dated 28.2.2025(Annexure-E/4), the
Sub-Collector has himself noted the fact the Petitioner
being a resident of the same village though not
resident of the service area, her candidature can be
considered. Her candidature was rejected not on the
above ground, but on the ground of producing a
resident certificate, which was 12 years old. Reference
to the resolution of the selection committee reveals
that the said ground was never cited for rejecting the
candidature of the Petitioner rather, it was held that
she was not a resident of the service area. Moreover, it
is evident from the materials placed on record that
some villagers had submitted objections to the
candidature of the Petitioner. It is needless to mention
that the selection is to be made strictly on the basis of
the guidelines for which, the objections, if any,
submitted by the villagers can have no relevance.
9. For the foregoing reasons therefore, this Court is
of the view that rejection of the Petitioner's candidature
on the ground that she does not specifically belong to
the service area of the Anganwadi Centre in question
cannot be sustained in the eye of law. The proceeding
of the selection committee as well as the decision of the
Sub-Collector as reflected in the letter dtd.28.2.2025 is
therefore set aside.
10. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. The
Selection Committee is directed to consider the
candidature of the Petitioner and if found suitable,
issue necessary orders of engagement in her favour
without any further delay. Consequently, the fresh
advertisement issued on 06.2.2025 is hereby quashed.
................................
Sashikanta Mishra,
Judge
Designation: A.D.R.-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary
Reason: Authentication Ashok Kumar Behera
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 22-Apr-2025 10:49:27
