[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Constitution Of India) vs State Of Odisha on 10 March, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.17998 of 2023
(In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India)
Doli Naik .... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha, represented through .... Opposite Parties
its Commissioner-cum-Secretary,
Women and Child Development
Department, Government of Odisha
Bhubaneswar and others
Appeared in this case:-
For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar Pati, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr. Sabita Ranjan Pattnaik,
Learned Additional Government
Advocate
(For the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 4)
Mr. Arijeet Mishra, Advocate
(For Opposite Party No.5)
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing : 18.02.2026 / date of judgment : 10.03.2026
A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the
impugned order dated 25.05.2023(Annexure-10) passed in RMC(AWW)
Appeal Case No.01 of 2022 by the Additional District Magistrate,
Nabarangpur(Opposite Party No.2).
2. The factual backgrounds of this writ petition, which prompted the
petitioner for filing the same is that, the petitioner belongs to Schedule
Caste community having her Sub-caste "Dombo" and her house is at
village Taragaon under Nabarangpur Police Station in the district of
Nabarangpur. She(petitioner) has passed matriculation(HSC)
Examination in the year 2007 in 3rd division securing 250 marks, +2 Arts
in the year 2010 and graduation from Berhampur University securing
64% marks.
The Opposite Party No.3 (Child Development Project Officer,
Nabarangpur) published an advertisement on dated 17.08.2021 as per
Advertisement No.352 inviting applications for the selection of
Anganwadi Workers in eleven Anganwadi centers including Taragaon
Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center indicating in Sl. No.3 of such
advertisement.
On the basis of such advertisement, the petitioner along with
eighteen candidates including the Opposite Party No.5 applied for the
same.
3. The Opposite Party No.3 selected to the petitioner as the
Anganwadi Worker of Taragaon Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center and as
per Order No.702 dated 23.02.2021 vide Annexure-6, she(Opposite Party
No.3) appointed to the petitioner as Aganwadi Worker of Taragaon
Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center and accordingly since 23.12.2021, the
petitioner has been working as Anganwadi Worker of Taragaon Harijan
Sahi Anganwadi Center.
4. On being aggrieved with the aforesaid selection of the petitioner as
Anganwadi worker of Taragaon Harijansahi Anganwadi Center, the
Opposite Party No.5(Anupama Sethia) challenged the same preferring an
appeal vide RMC(AWW) Appeal Case No.01 of 2022 before the
Additional District Magistrate, Nabarangpur(Opposite Party No.2) on the
ground that, she(Opposite Party No.5) should have been selected for the
same, as she has secured more marks in HSC Examination than the
petitioner and her permanent house is under the service area of Taragaon
Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center and although, she had submitted her
Residential Certificate showing her residence under the service area of
Taragaon Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center with her application, but, the
Opposite Party No.3(Child Development Project Officer, Nabarangpur)
illegally selected to the petitioner(Doli Naik) debarring her(Opposite
Party No.5) to be selected as Anganwadi Worker of Taragaon Harijan
Sahi Anganwadi Center on the ground that, she (Opposite Party No.5)
had not submitted her recent Caste Certificate with her application. For
which, the selection of the petitioner(Doli Naik) as the Anganwadi
Worker of Taragaon Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center is to be set aside
and she(Opposite Party No.5) will be appointed as the Anganwadi
Worker of the said center.
5. That appeal vide RMC(AWW) Appeal Case No.01 of 2022 filed
by the Opposite Party No.5 was heard by the Additional District
Magistrate, Nabarangpur(Opposite Party No.2) from both the sides and
final order thereof was passed by the Opposite Party No.2 on dated
25.05.2023(Annexure-10) allowing that appeal and cancelled the order of
appointment dated 23.12.2021 of the petitioner(Doli Naik) as Anganwadi
Workers of Taragaon Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center and directed to the
Opposite Party No.3 to carry out that order issuing fresh appointment
order/letter in favour of Anupama Sethia(Opposite Party No.5) assigning
the reasons that,
"she Anupama Sethia(Opposite Party No.5 in this writ petition),
has secured highest marks among the eligible candidates and she had
attached her Caste Certificate issued by the Tahasildar, Nabarangpur on
dated 10.05.2017 with her application and she had submitted a fresh
Caste Certificate issued on dated 14.09.2021 in her favour before the
selection process is over, which was not considered by the selection
committee members and she (Opposite Party No.5) has secured 329
marks in HSC Examination, but, the petitioner has secured 250 marks
and as per Odisha Gazette Notification, the validity of Caste Certificate
of the Schedule Caste candidates shall be for the life time and permanent
in nature unless, until he/she changes his/her religion to Christianity.
Therefore, on the basis of the Odisha Gazette Notification submission of
any fresh Caste Certificate by the Opposite Party No.5 in this writ
petition was not required. For which, she(Opposite Party No.5) is to be
appointed as an Anganwadi Worker of Tarangaon Harijan Sahi
Anganwadi Center in cancelling the appointment of the petitioner(Doli
Nayak)."
6. On being dissatisfied with the aforesaid final order dated
25.05.2023(Annexure-10) passed in RMC(AWW) Appeal Case No.01 of
2022 by the Additional District Magistrate, Nabarangpur(Opposite Party
No.2) in cancelling the appointment of the petitioner(Doli Naik) as
Anganwadi Worker of Taragaon Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center and the
direction to appoint the Opposite Party No.5(Anupama Sethia) for the
same, the petitioner(Doli Naik) challenged the same by filing this writ
petition against the Opposite Parties including Anupama Sethia arraying
her as Opposite Party No.5 praying for quashing the aforesaid order
dated 25.05.2023(Annexure-10) passed by the Additional District
Magistrate, Nabarangpur(Opposite Party No.2) in RMC(AWW) Appeal
Case No.01 of 2022 on the ground that, as the Opposite Party No.5 had
not submitted her Caste Certificate within six months of the last date of
application as per the requirements of the advertisement, for which, non-
selection to her(Opposite Party No.5) as Anganwadi Worker of Taragaon
Harijan Sahi Anganwadi Center cannot be held as illegal. Therefore, the
impugned order dated 25.05.2023 vide Annexure-10 passed by the
Additional District Magistrate, Nabarangpur(Opposite Party No.2) is
liable to be quashed.
7. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned Additional Government Advocate for the Opposite Party Nos.1
to 4 and the learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.5.
8. On the basis of the materials available in the record, the impugned
order dated 25.05.2023(Anenxure-10) passed by the Opposite Party No.2
in RMC(AWW) Appeal Case No.01 of 2022 and the rival submissions of
the learned counsels of both the sides, the crux of this writ petition is
that,
when the Opposite Party No.5 in this writ petition has secured
more marks in HSC Examination than the petitioner and when, Opposite
Party No.5 had submitted her Caste Certificate dated 10.05.2017 issued
by the Tahasildar, Nanaragpur with her application and when,
she(Opposite Party No.5) filed an another fresh Caste Certificate on
dated 14.09.2021 during selection process showing her similar Caste as
her Caste in the previous Certificate, then at this juncture, whether the
impugned order dated 25.05.2023(Annexure-10) passed by the Opposite
Party No.2 cancelling the appointment of the petitioner(Doli Naik) and
direction for the appointment Opposite Party No.5(Anupama Sethia) is
sustainable under law?
9. When, the Opposite Party No.2 being a higher Revenue Official of
the Government specifically stated in the impugned order dated
25.05.2023(Annexure-10) that, the validity of a Caste Certificate issued
in favour of a Schedule Caste candidate shall be for the life time and
permanent in nature unless and until the candidate changes his/her
religion to Christianity and when, the petitioner had submitted her Caste
Certificate dated 10.05.2017 with her application and when, she(Opposite
Party No.5) again submitted her Caste Certificate showing her same
Caste with her previous Caste Certificate during the process of selection
and when, she(Opposite Party No.5) has secured more marks in HSC
Examination than the petitioner, then at this juncture, she(Opposite Party
No.5) should not have been kept out of the zone of consideration along
with other candidates including the petitioner (Doli Naik) on the ground
of non-submission of her Caste Certificate issued within a period of six
months of the last date of submission of the application.
10 As per the impugned order dated 25.05.2023(Annexure-10), when
the Opposite Party No.2 has cancelled the appointment order dated
23.12.2021(Annexure-6) of the petitioner(Doli Naik) gave direction for
appointment of the Opposite Party No.5(Anupama Sethia) assigning the
reasons that,
"as per the requirement, Anupama Sethia(Opposite Party No.5)
has secured more marks in HSC Examination, i.e., 329 marks, but, the
petitioner(Doli Naik)has secured 250 marks and she(Opposite Party
No.5) had submitted her Caste Certificate along with her application and
when, as per the Gazette Notification of the Government of Odisha, the
validity of the Caste Certificate of the Schedule Caste candidates like the
Opposite Party No.5 is for the life time and permanent in nature unless
and until he/she changes his/her religion to Christianity and when, there
is no material to show about the change of caste of the Opposite Party
No.5 to Christianity, then at this juncture, the reasons assigned by the
Additional District Magistrate, Nabarangpur(Opposite Party No.2) in
passing the impugned order dated 25.05.2023 vide Annexure-10 cannot
be held as erroneous."
For which, the question of interfering with the same through this
writ petition filed by the petitioner does not arise.
11. Therefore, there is no merit in this writ petition filed by the
petitioner. The same must fail.
12. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed on
contest.
13. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of
finally.
( A.C. Behera )
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 10th of March, 2026/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Designation: Personal Assistant
