1 | P a g e Serial No. 42 Regular Cause List. HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR ******* WP(C) 1378/2024 CM(3733/2024) CM(5663/2024) CM(6542/2024. YASMEENA. …Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Saif ul Islam, Advocate. VERSUS UNION TERITTORY OF J AND K. Through: Mr. Waseem Gul, Government Advocate. Mr. R.A. Bhat, Advocate for R-6. …Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE. ORDER 12-05-2026 01. The petitioner claims that she has been engaged as an Anganwadi Worker in an Anganwadi Centre Sheikh Mohalla Brein, against an available post in terms of Order No. DPO/ICDS/Sgr/2020/4630-33 dated 2nd of July, 2020, issued by District Programme Officer, ICDS, Srinagar- respondent No. 4 herein, whereafter, vide Order No. ICDS/BWT/ESTT/2020/198-99 dated 22nd July, 2020, issued by the same authority, she has been transferred to Anganwadi Centre Patti Brein. 02. It is the contention of the petitioner that the official respondents have issued the impugned Advertisement Notice No. 40 of 2024 dated 12th June, 2024, whereby applications have, inter alia, been invited for filling up the post of Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Centre Patti Brein, which post is already 2 | P a g e occupied by the petitioner. On this ground, the petitioner has laid challenge to the impugned Advertisement Notice to the aforesaid extent. 03. The official respondents, in their reply, have contended that during examination of the documents, it was revealed that the petitioner had been engaged as Anganwadi Worker by the then authorities at the helm of affairs without following the due procedure of selection and in violation of Government Order No. 215 SW of 2018 dated 21st September, 2018, whereby a blanket ban had been imposed upon engagement of Anganwadi Workers /Anganwadi Helpers. It has been further submitted that the petitioner has been illegally engaged as an Anganwadi Worker and that an inquiry in this regard has already been initiated in all such cases where the then CDPO, Srinagar, had issued engagement orders without approval of the competent authority. 04. Respondent No. 6, in her reply, has not stated anything as to in what capacity she is aggrieved of the appointment of the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker. However, during the course of oral arguments, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6 has submitted that respondent No. 6 had participated in the fresh selection process initiated pursuant to the impugned Advertisement Notice and that her name figures in the tentative selection list. 05. Heard and considered. 06. It is an admitted position that the engagement of the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker has not been cancelled by the official respondents till date. It is also not in dispute that the engagement order issued in favour of the petitioner has emanated from respondent No. 4, who was competent to issue such orders. The only contention raised by the official respondents is that approval of the 3 | P a g e competent authority is lacking in the present case and, besides this, the engagement of the petitioner is illegal, being dehors the rules and without following the procedure prescribed for engagement of Anganwadi Workers/ Anganwadi Helpers. 07. Even if it is assumed that the engagement of the petitioner was dehors the rules, once it is shown that the engagement order issued in her favour is not fake, the official respondents in order to dispense with her service ought to have cancelled her engagement order by issuing a specific order fin this behalf without cancelling the appointment of the petitioner. Advertisement Notice for filling up the post which is presently being occupied by the petitioner ought not have been issued. The petitioner was required to be afforded an opportunity of hearing before cancellation of her engagement. This has admittedly not been done by the official respondents. Without undertaking the aforesaid exercise, the official respondents could not have put the post of Anganwadi Worker in Anganwadi Centre Patti Brein, which is presently occupied by the petitioner, to fresh advertisement. 08. In view of the above, the instant Writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- I. The selection process initiated pursuant to the impugned Advertisement Notice, insofar as it pertains to filling up the post of Anganwadi Worker at Anganwadi Centre Patti Brein, shall be put on hold. II. The official respondents shall be at liberty to take such action as may be warranted under law in respect of the engagement order issued in favour of the petitioner, strictly after following due procedure and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4 | P a g e III. The petitioner shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy in case her engagement is cancelled by the official respondents. IV. Till such time any action is taken by the official respondents pursuant to this order, the petitioner shall be allowed to continue at her present place of posting, provided she is still working, and she shall also be paid her legitimately earned wages. 09. Disposed of along with connected CMs. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 12-05-2026 Showkat Khan