APHC010056922014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 19912/2014 Between: 1. K.CHITTEMMA, W/O A.SRINIVASULU,, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, R/O NALLACHERUVU VILLAGE & MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WOMEN, CHILD WELFARE AND DISABLE WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AT HYDERABAD. 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY (ICDS), ANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER I C D S PROJECT, KADIRI EAST, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, ANANTHAPURAM. 5. SMT G SUJATHA W/O A VISWANADH, AGED ABOUT 24 YEAR, ANGANWADI WORKER, RIO NALLACHERUVU VILLAGE & MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. R SUJAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR WOMEN DEV-CHILD WELFARE(AP) 2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3. GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE(AP) The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Petitioner is challenging the appointment of the 5th respondent as Anganwadi worker. 2. The petitioner has filed the presented petition writ primarily on the ground that the petitioner had secured 414 marks in the S.S.C. examination and that the petitioner is aged about 26 years. It is also stated in the affidavit that the 5th respondent was aged 22 years and she secured 334 marks in the S.S.C. examination and on merit, the petitioner ought to have been appointed for the post of Anganwadi worker instead of the 5th respondent. 3. The counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent and it is stated in the counter that the selection committee has awarded proportionate marks for the S.S.C qualification to the petitioner and the 5th respondent. However on merits, the petitioner secured 39.10 marks under the overall merit and the selection committee awarded 39.43 marks to the 5th respondent on overall merit and in pursuance of the recommendation of the selection committee appointment orders were issued to the 5th respondent. 4. Considering the same, no grounds are made out for interference by this Court in the selection process. On these considerations, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 4 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 06.04.2026 SR