Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010014852023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/469/2023 MINARA KHATUN W/O- RAFIK SHEIKH, R/O- VILL- SINGIMARI PT-II, P.O. TISTERPAR, P.S. AND DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6 2:THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE ASSAM UZANBAZAR GHY-1 3:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM 4:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER GAURIPUR ICDS PROJECT DHARMASHALA DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM 5:ANIMA KHATUN W/O- MOHAMMAD MOSTAFA SK R/O- 277 NO. SINGIMARI PT-II ANGANWADI CENTER P.S. AND DIST.- DHUBRI ASSA Page No.# 2/5 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D KALITA, MR. H R DAS Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MS S PATAR (R5),MR. A T SARKAR (R5) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 17.06. 2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Also heard Mr. R. Dhar, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State, Mr. A. T. Sarkar, for Respondent No. 5. 2. The petitioner in this writ petition has assailed the appointment of Respondent No. 5 to the post of Anganwadi Worker in respect of 140 No. Singimari Pt-II AWC under Gauripur ICDS project, Dharamshala, Dhubri. Pursuant to the advertisement dated 30.08.2022, both the petitioner and the Respondent No. 5 had applied for and submitted their candidature. Under the terms and conditions of the said advertisement, at Clause I it is provided that the candidate for the post of Anganwadi worker for Mini Anganwadi Centre/ helper should be a permanent resident of the concerned Gaon Panchayat including a resident within the functional are of the concerned centre. At Clause II & III, it is also provided that the age of the candidate for the said post should be between 18 years to 44 years as on 01.01.2022; and the education qualification should be Higher Secondary/ class XII pass. This writ petition has been filed primarily challenging the appointment of Respondent No. 5 on the ground that she is not a permanent resident within the functional area of the 140 No. Singimari Pt-II AWC under Gauripur ICDS project, Dhubri. Page No.# 3/5 3. The learned State Respondent as well as the Respondent No. 5 have contested the case of the petitioner. In the affidavit filed by the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), namely Respondent No. 4, it is stated in paragraph-5 that the Respondent No. 5 is the local inhabitant under the jurisdiction of 140 No. Singimari Pt II Anganwadi Centre and her name was included in the Survey Register vide House No. 55 of 2022. The said register also produced some records before the Court in support of the contention. Thereafter, upon being liberty granted by this Court, the petitioner filed an additional affidavit to bring on record that the Respondent No. 5 does not have the educational qualification of Higher Secondary/Class XII pass. It is stated by the petitioner that, in response to a communication issued to the Principal of School from which the said respondent claims to have passed, namely Rokakhata, H.S. School, Bilashipara, Dhubri, whereby there is a categorical statement by the Principal that the Respondent No. 5, namely Anima Khatun that she never appeared in the Higher Secondary examination bearing Roll No. 0418-20045 from the said school in the year 2020. The said communication was addressed to the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Gauripur ICDS Project, Dharamshala. 4. The learned State Respondents do not dispute the information sought for by the Child Development Project Officer, Dhubri from the Principal of Rokakhata, H.S. School, Bilashipara, Dhubri in respect of the eligibility of Private Respondent No. 5. 5. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that, for ends of justice and considering that questions of facts are involved, the writ petition can be closed Page No.# 4/5 with a direction to the Director of Women & Child Development, Government of Assam, to call for all relevant records in respect of the grievances ventilated by the petitioner regarding eligibility of Respondent No. 5 and thereafter pass a detailed order. It is also directed that, before passing such an order, an opportunity of hearing to all concerned must be accorded. 5. Needless to say, any order that may be passed by the said Director, copies thereof shall be served upon the contesting parties. 6. If, upon examination of the matter, the Director comes to a conclusion that the private Respondent No. 5 does not fulfil the required eligibility criteria prescribed in the said advertisement, then consequential order may be passed for appointment of the writ petitioner, if she otherwise fulfils all the criteria specified therein. 7. The writ petitioner will furnish a certified copy of this order, along with the copy of the writ petition, including the affidavits filed by the contesting parties, before the Director. Thereafter, the Director will call for all required documents from the Office of the CDPO, Gauripur ICDS Project, Dharamshala and pass appropriate orders as directed. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above. 9. Let the aforesaid exercise be carried out within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. JUDGE Page No.# 5/5 Comparing Assistant