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 its Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Women and Child Development Department, Government of Odisha Bhubaneswar and others …. Opposite Parties 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). Page 2 of 9 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. Page 9 of 9 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