Orissa High Court
Babita Munda vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opp. ... on 20 August, 2025
Author: Sashikanta Mishra
Bench: Sashikanta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.18740 of 2012
Babita Munda .... Petitioner
Represented by
Mr. A.K. Biswal, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha & Others .... Opp. Parties
Represented by
Mr. S.S. Routray,
Additional Standing Counsel
Mr. K.C. Rajguru Mohapatra,
Advocate (For O.P. No.5)
CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
ORDER
20.08.2025
Order No.
09. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
. 2. The order dated 25.05.2012 passed by the Collector,
Mayurbhanj in ICDS M.C. No.3 of 2012 is under challenge in the
present writ application.
3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner was selected as
Anganwdi Helper as per order dated 30.09.2012 of the CDPO,
Bijatala in the district of Mayurbhnaj. Said selection was held on
the basis of her performance in a written test held by the selection
committee. The private Opposite Party No.5 challenged the
procedure adopted by the selection committee by approaching the
Collector in the aforementioned case.
4. Be it noted that the Opposite Party No.5 had earlier
approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.419 of 2012, which was
disposed of by directing the Collector to consider the
representation submitted by her. Accordingly, the Collector heard
both the parties and disposed of the representation by means of the
impugned order.
5. Reading of the impugned order shows that the Collector has
referred to the relevant guidelines issued by the Government in
Women & Child Development Department i.e., dated 24.11.1997,
23.12.2006 and 29.04.2010. The Collector has observed that there
is no provision in any of the guidelines empowering the selection
committee to make selection by conducting written test of the
candidates. On such basis, the Collector deemed it proper to quash
the selection of the petitioner.
6. Heard Mr. A.K. Biswal, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Mr. S.S. Routray, learned ASC for the State and Mr. K.C. Rajguru
Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the private Opposite
Party No.5.
7. Mr. Biswal submits that the selection could not be made by
the Mahila Sabha for which the selection committee decided to test
the inter se merit of the candidates by conducting a written test.
There is nothing wrong in adopting such procedure.
8. Mr. Routray, while admitting the facts, fairly submits that the
guidelines do not prescribe any such procedure to be adopted.
9. Mr. Rajguru Mohapatra also makes similar arguments as the
State counsel and submits that the selection committee has no
power to travel beyond the guidelines.
10. The facts of the case are admitted inasmuch as it is common
ground that the petitioner was selected on the basis of her
performance in a written test conducted by the selection
committee. Perusal of the guidelines referred above reveals that
there is no such provision for conducting any written test to decide
the suitability of the candidates. In the absence of any statutory
rule, it is the settled position of law that the guidelines issued by
the Government will have a statutory force. Moreover, it is the
settled position of law that if the law requires a thing to be done in
a particular manner, it has to be done in that manner or not at all.
Reference in this regard may be had to the oft-quoted judgment of
the Privy council in the case of Nazir Ahmad v. The King
Emperor 1936 SCC OnLine PC 4.
11. The guidelines dated 24.11.1997 clearly provide the
following:-
"Procedure for Selection:- A Helper will be selected by a
committee consisting of the following persons.
(i)C.D.P.O. of the Project Chairperson
(ii)Supervisor in-charge of the area Member
(iii)A.N.M. in-charge of the area Member
The above committee should select the Helper in consultation
with the women groups of the village. In case, for any reasons
to be recorded in writing it is not possible to make the
selection in a particular village the selection may be made in
the Project Head Quarters by the above mentioned
committee."
12. Thus, there is no provision for conducting written test to
select Anganwadi Helper. This Court therefore, finds that the
Collector has rightly interpreted the guidelines to arrive at the
conclusion that the selection process was not in consonance with
the statute. There is hence, no reason for this Court to interfere
with the impugned order. The writ application is therefore,
dismissed.
13. The interim order stands vacated.
(Sashikanta Mishra)
Signed by: PUSPANJALI GHADAI
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 21-Aug-2025 19:17:27
