Lili Bastia vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 9859 Ori

Orissa High Court

Lili Bastia vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ... on 11 November, 2025

Author: Sashikanta Mishra

Bench: Sashikanta Mishra

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

      W.P.(C). No. 25223 of 2019 and 26378 of 2019

(An Application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution
of India)
W.P.(C). No. 25223 of 2019

Lili Bastia            ......                    Petitioner

                              -Versus-

State of Odisha & Others      ....             Opposite Parties

_____________________________________________

   For Petitioner   : Mr. S. Sourav, Advocate,

   For Opp. Party : Mr. S.N.Pattnaik, AGA

                      Mr. S. Swain, Advocate (O.P no.5)
_______________________________________________________

W.P.(C). No. 26378 of 2019

Puspanjali Patra                ......                    Petitioner

                              -Versus-

State of Odisha & Others      ....             Opposite Parties

_____________________________________________

   For Petitioner   : Mr. S. Swain, Advocate,

   For Opp. Party : Mr. S.N.Pattnaik, AGA

                      Mr. S. Sourav, Advocate (O.P no.6)
_______________________________________________________



                                         Page 1 of 18
       CORAM:
           JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

                              JUDGMENT

11th November, 2025

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

Both these writ applications involving common facts

were heard together and are being disposed of by this

common judgment.

Facts:

2. The CDPO, Ullunda in the district of Subarnapur

published an advertisement on 31.05.2017 for

engagement of helper in Badankaria Anganwadi Centre.

In the Gram Sabha held on 06.06.2017, Lili Bastia

(petitioner in W.P.(C). No. 25223 of 2019) was selected.

She was issued with order of engagement by the CDPO

on 07.06.2017 and joined thereafter. One Puspanjali

Patra (Petitioner in W.P.(C). No. 26378 of 2019), who was

also one of the applicants, objected to the selection of Lili

Bastia by submitting a representation to the CDPO on

12.06.2017 mainly on the ground that Lili Bastia does

not belong to Badankaria village but is a resident of

Sarkaridadar village and as such, was not eligible for

selection. Since no action was taken on her

representation, Puspanjali Patra approached this Court

in W.P.(C). No. 18452 of 2017. By order dated

30.10.2017, this Court, without entering into the merits

of the claim disposed of the writ application granting

liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation

before the Collector of the district with a further direction

for disposal of the representation within four weeks. By

order dated 25.11.2019, the Collector, Subarnapur, after

hearing the parties and other Government functionaries

held that the selection procedure was not acceptable as

the proceeding is not in detail nor clear. As such the

appointment of Anganwadi Helper was cancelled with

direction to float a fresh advertisement following the

prescribed guidelines. It was also directed that Lili Bastia

was to continue as Anganwadi Helper till engagement of

the new Anganwadi Helper. Both the writ petitioners are

aggrieved by the above order of the Collector.

Case of Lili Bastia:

3. It is claimed by Lili Bastia that she was selected in

the village meeting wherein Puspanjali Patra was also

present but she did not show any interest in spite of

sufficient chance provided. Further, the petitioner

satisfied all eligibility criteria and it is specifically averred

that she is a resident of the Anganwadi Centre area in

question. Both Badankaria and Sarkaridadar are covered

under one Anganwadi centre and as such the petitioner

was eligible. The Collector has not considered the matter

in the proper perspective but purely on technical grounds

cancelled the selection of the petitioner. On such facts,

the petitioner Lili Bastia has filed the writ application

with the following prayer:

"The petitioner therefore prays that | Your Lordship's would graciously please to admit the writ petition, call for the records and after hearing both the parties quash/set aside the order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the Op.No.2 which is under Annexure-1 by. issuing

writ/writs in the nature of Certiorari/Mandamus . in the interest of justice.

And further be please to re-engage the petitioner as an anganwadi helper for the Badaankaria Anganwadi Centre in the greater interest of justice. And further pass any order/orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper.

And for this act of kindness the petitioner is In duty bound shall ever pray."

4. In the counter affidavit filed by the CDPO, Ullunda,

it is stated that the relevant guidelines dated 24.11.1997

and 29.04.2010 regarding appointment of Anganwadi

Helper were duly followed. Puspanjali Patra refused to

function as Anganwadi helper nor her signature was

available in the proceeding register, which creates doubt

regarding her presence at the meeting. The Mahila Sabha

nominated two eligible candidates and Lili Bastia was

selected by lottery. Lili Bastia is residing in village

Badankaria but she is from village Sarkaridadar.

Case of Puspanjali Patra:

5. The petitioner claims that 5 candidates had applied

for the post of Anganwadi Helper. The Mahila Sabha was

held on 06.06.2017 during which the women of

Badankaria village strongly objected to the candidature of

Lili Bastia as she does not belong to Badankaria.

However, ignoring their objections, Lili Bastia was

selected. Lili Bastia is a resident of village Sarkaridadar,

which is evident from her voter identity card. The

petitioner's distress condition and eligibility were ignored

in the selection of Lili Bastia which was against the

norms of the advertisement. The Collector disposed of the

representation after 2 years and 14 days only because

the petitioner filed two contempt applications. The

Collector did not consider the residence aspect and made

out a third case by referring to the age limit mentioned in

the proceeding, even though no one was affected by the

same. Under such circumstances, the petitioner ought to

have been selected instead of directing to float fresh

advertisement. On such facts, the petitioner Puspanjali

Patra has filed this writ application with the following

prayer:

"It is therefore humbly prayed that under the above circumstances, the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue RULE NISI, calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause and if the Opp. Parties failed to

file show cause or filed insufficient cause on perusal of causes shown make the said RULE absolute and be further pleased to:

(i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other. Appropriate writ or order quashing the order dated 07.06.2017, Annexure-2 appointing the Opposite Party No.6 as Anganwadi Helper, Badankaria Anganwadi Centre, Badankaria under I.C.D.S. Project, Ullunda in the districtof Subarnapur and order dated 25.11.2019 under Annexure-6 passed by the learned Collector, Subarnapur-Opposite Party No.2 so far as it relates directing for new advertisement for the same post holding that selection process is not in details and clear and allowing O.P. No.6 to continue as Anganwadi Helper until engagement new Anganwadi Helper for Badankaria Anganwadi Centre, Badankaria is made as wrong and illegal;

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the opposite parties more particularly the C.D.P.0., Ullunda-Opposite Party No.5 to appoint the petitioner as Anganwadi Helper, Badankaria Anganwadi Centre, Badankaria under I.C.D.S. Project, Ullunda in the district of Subarnapur with effect from the date the Opposite Party No.6 got appointment with all consequential benefits within a stipulated period as fixed by the Hon''ble Court;

And pass such other order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper;

And for the said act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray."

6. Counter affidavit has been filed by the CDPO stating

that Lili Bastia is a resident of village Sarkaridadar but

the Anganwadi centre of Badankaria consists of two

revenue villages namely, Sarkaridadar and Badankaria.

As such applicants from both the villages can apply for

the post. The Collector noticed some discrepancy in the

proceeding of the Gram Sabha and therefore, directed to

float the fresh advertisement.

SUBMISSIONS:

7. Heard Mr. S. Sourav, learned counsel for the Lili

Bastia (petitioner in W.P.(C). No.-25223 of 2019), Mr. S.

Swain, learned counsel for Puspanjali Patra (Petitioner in

W.P.(C). No. -26378 of 2019) and Mr. S.N.Pattnaik,

learned AGA for the State.

8. Mr. Sourav would emphatically argue that the norms

laid down by Government in the relevant guidelines were

duly followed in the selection of Anganwadi Helper. Since

Badankaria Anganwadi Centre covers both Badankaria

and Sarkaridadar villages, it cannot be said that Lili

Bastia was not eligible being a resident of Sarkaridadar.

Mr. Sourav further argues that even otherwise, the

complaint could not have been entertained at the

instance of Puspanjali Patra as she was not eligible being

only a 7th pass candidate, whereas the guidelines require

the candidates to have passed class VIII. The Collector

has unnecessarily delved into the so-called error in

mentioning the age limit in the proceeding of the

selection committee. Though the age limit as per the

guidelines is 18 to 42 years, same was wrongly

mentioned as 20 to 40 years. However, no candidate was

affected by such wrong recording nor the selected

candidate was aged beyond the age limit. Under such

circumstances, the selection of the petitioner could not

have been interfered with by the Collector.

9. Mr. S.Swain, on the other hand, would argue that the

advertisement itself was issued for the villagers of

Badankaria. Lili Bastia is admittedly not a resident of

Badankaria but of Sarkaridadar and was therefore,

ineligible. The Collector, while disposing of the

representation did not go into this aspect at all and

though she found the selection of Lili Bastia to be wrong,

directed a new advertisement to be floated instead of

directing engagement of Puspanjali Patra.

10. Mr. S.N.Pattnaik, learned AGA submits that as per

the records available there is one Anganwadi Centre at

Badankaria covering two villages, namely, Badankaria

and Sarkaridadar. Therefore, it cannot be said that Lili

Bastia was not eligible. However, the proceeding of the

selection committee suggests that the same was not

conducted as per the relevant guidelines for which the

Collector rightly interfered in the matter.

11. The facts of the case as narrated are not disputed.

The selection of Anganwadi Helper is governed by the

guidelines issued by the Government on 24.11.1997

which is quoted below:

" GOVERNMENT OF ODISHA WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NO. 9994/WCD, Dated 24.11.1997 From Shri J. Digal, IAS, Director, Social Welfare. To The All C.D.P.Os/District Social Welfare Officers/ Sub- Collectors/Collectors.

Sub.: Guidelines for selection of Helpers for Anganwadi Centre. Sir, In supersession of all earlier instructions on the above subject I am directed to convey the following guidelines for selection of Helpers for Anganwadi Centres. These guidelines should be adhered to while making the selection.

ELIGIBILITY: To be eligible for selection as Helper for an Anganwa Centre the following eligibility criteria must be fulfilled.

(i)She must be a lady of the locality and acceptable to Anganwadi Worker

(ii) She should not be of less than 18 years of age

(iii)She can continue in the job till she discharges her di efficiently

(iv) The CDPO is competent to appoint and discharge the Helper

(v) Preference should be given to an Orphan, Widow, Separated Divorced or Deserted woman

2. PROCEDURE FOR SELECTION: A Helper will be selected by a committee consisting of the following persons

(i)CDPO of the Project ....................Chairperson

(ii)Supervisor in-charge of the area.........Member

(iii)ANM 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 However, the candidate selected should fulfill all the eligibility criteria as mentioned at para-

1 above Though the Odisha Reservation of Vacancy Rules (ORV) is not applicable in this selection, in the villages predominantly occupied by the SC ST and OBC population the Helper selected may be from any of these communities who is in majority.

Sd/- Director, Social Welfare"

By further guidelines dated 29.04.2010, was following

was clarified:

GOVERNMENT OF ODISHA WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NO. 8138/WCD, Dated 29.04.2010 From Smt. Sujata Kartnikeyan, IAS Director, Social Welfare, Ex-officio Addl. Secretary to Govt. To All Collectors Sub.: Guidelines for selection of Helpers for Anganwadi Centre. Sir/Madam,

In partial modification of the guidelines for the selection of Helpers for Anganwadi Centres circulated vide this department letter No. 999/WCD, dated 24.11.1997 the following amendment is made as under:

In point No.1 (ii) it may be added & read as "the upper age limit is fixed up to 42 years".

In point No.1 (v) it may be added & read as "in case of divorces, legal separation is necessary. The applicant has to produce legally separated document issued by the competent Court".

Sd/- Director, Social Welfare"

12. It is nobody's case that the selected candidate Lili

Bastia did not fulfil the age criteria as per the guidelines.

The only objection raised against her candidature is in

respect of her residence, which is said to be beyond the

service area of the Badankaria Anganwadi Centre. It is

not disputed that she is a resident of village

Sarkaridadar. It would be interesting to refer to the

counter affidavits filed by the same officer, namely, CDPO

in both the writ applications. In W.P.(C). No. 25223 of

2019, the CDPO, in his counter has simply stated that

the petitioner (Lili Bastia) is residing in village

Badankaria but as per the voter identity card belongs to

Sarkaridadar. In the counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C).No.

26378 of 2019 the following has been stated under

paragraph 4 (h)

"4.h) That in reply to the averments made in paragraphs-6 and 8 of the writ petition, it is humbly submitted that the opp.party No.6 is a resident of village Sarkaridadar, but not Badankaria. The Anganwadi Center Badankaria consists of two revenue villages i.e Sarkaridadar and Badankaria. Applicants from both the villages can apply for the post ofAnganwadi Helper in respect of Badankaria Anganwadi Center."

Though the advertisement seems to be directed to the

villagers of Badankaria without mentioning Sarkaridadar,

yet in view of the categorical assertion of the CDPO

quoted above coupled with the information produced by

the State counsel during hearing of the writ application

to the effect that the Badankaria Anganwadi Centre

covers both the villages, this Court is unable to accept

the contentions that Lili Bastia was not eligible on the

ground of being a resident of Sarkaridadar village.

13. The above assertion of the CDPO has not been

specifically refuted by Puspanjali Patra. It would be apt to

refer to the guidelines dated 24.11.1997, quoted earlier,

which provide that a candidate must be a lady of the

locality. The said guidelines, however, do not define the

term "locality".

This Court had the occasion to interpret said expression in

its judgment dated 15.04.2025 passed in Nirupama Pani

v. State of Odisha and Others (W.P.(C) No. 5277 of 2025),

wherein it was held as follows:

"Perusal of the guidelines issued on 15.03.2023 by the Government relating to selection of Anganwadi Helpers reveals that, as per Clause 1(i), the candidate must be a lady of the locality and acceptable to 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 otherwise been 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."

Though the above judgment considered the guidelines

dated 15.03.2023, the same interpretation would equally

apply to the guidelines dated 24.11.1997 since both

guidelines have used identical language.

Thus, in view of the undisputed factual position that the

Anganwadi Centre at Badankaria covers both Badankaria

and Sarkaridadar under the same revenue village, the

eligibility of Lili Bastia cannot be questioned,

notwithstanding the fact that the advertisement did not

specifically mention so.

14. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the

Collector has not delved into these aspects at all but

focused her attention on the so-called discrepancies in

the proceeding of the selection committee. Two issues

were flagged by her-firstly, the age limit is mentioned as

20 to 40 years instead of 18 to 42 years and secondly,

proceeding was not in detail and clear. As regards the

first issue, it is nobody's case that Lili Bastia did not fulfil

the age criteria or that any other candidate was affected

by such wrong mentioning of the age limit in the

proceeding. As to the second issue, the Collector's order

itself is not clear as regards the so-called lack of clarity in

the proceeding. It is stated that as per statement of

Sector Lady Supervisor Smt. Madri Nag, lottery method

has been adopted at the time of selection between two

applicants that is, Lili Bastia and Samari Padhan as the

villagers refused to accept other three applicants out of

total five. The proceeding however, reveals that lottery

method was adopted for five applicants. The statement of

the Sector Lady Supervisor has not been placed before

this Court. Be that as it may, there being nothing in the

proceeding to suggest that all five applicants were not

included in the lottery, the Collector must be held to have

erred in placing reliance on the so-called statement made

by the Lady Supervisor. It must be kept in mind that the

proceeding was also signed by the CDPO, and therefore,

cannot simply be brushed aside on the basis of the

statement of the lady supervisor.

15. Another aspect that appears to have escaped the

attention of the Collector is, the eligibility of Puspanjali

Patra herself. Though the guidelines prescribe the

minimum educational clarification as being 8th pass,

Puspanjali Patra had only 7th pass qualification making

her ineligible thereby. That apart, though she claimed to

be an orphan but as per the statement of Anganwadi

Worker Mandakini Mahakur she was not an orphan as

her father was alive and living with him. Most

significantly, the Collector has herself noted that

Puspanjali Patra admitted the above fact. If such is the

case, then it amounts to approaching the authority with

unclean hands. Puspanjali Patra having falsely projected

herself as an orphan, the objection submitted by her

should have been thrown out on such score alone.

16. For the foregoing reasons therefore, this Court finds

that the impugned order suffers from gross infirmity and

incorrect appreciation of the relevant facts by the

Collector. As such, the same cannot be sustained in the

eye of law. This Court has therefore, no hesitation in

interfering with it.

17. For the foregoing reasons therefore, W.P.(C). No.

25223 of 2019, filed by Lili Bastia succeeds and is

therefore, allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The

authorities are directed to allow her to continue as

Anganwadi Helper in the centre in question. W.P.(C). No.

26378 of 2019, filed by Puspanajali Patra being devoid of

merit is therefore, dismissed. There shall be no order as

to costs.

...............................

Sashikanta Mishra, Judge Deepak