- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO. 200116 OF 2023 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. PREMALA W/O LATE TUKARAM AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: ANGANWADI ASSISTANT TADPALLI VILLAGE TQ: DIST: BIDAR – 585403. …APPELLANT (BY SRI VARUN PATIL, ADV. FOR SRI SHIVANAND PATIL & SANDEEP VIJAY KUMAR, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIDHANDA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BIDAR-585101. 3. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING OFFICER TQ: BIDAR, DIST: BIDAR-585101. 4. THE DY. COMMISSIONER, BIDAR DISTRICT, BIDAR-585101. Digitally signed by RAMESH MATHAPATI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 5. SMT. SHILPARANI W/O LATE RAMDAS AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O TADAPALLI VILLAGE, TQ: DIST: BIDAR-585101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MALLIKARJUN BASAREDDY, GA FOR R1 TO R4; SRI HALAPPA HEROOR, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 17.08.2023. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This intra Court appeal is filed challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.08.2023 passed in W.P.No.202122/2022 (S-RES), wherein the writ petition filed by the respondent No.5 herein was allowed. The respondent-authorities were directed to reinstate respondent No.5 into the post of Anganawadi helper of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 Tadapalli Village, Anganawadi Centre-2, Bidar Taluk and District within a period of two weeks. 2. Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that, the respondent No.5 filed the writ petition seeking prayer to issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 18.07.2022 passed by the 2nd respondent herein, on the ground that the 5th respondent has secured 515 marks out of 625, whereas the appellant has secured 495 marks out of 600 in 9th standard examination and she meets the requirement of clause 4(3) of the Government Order dated 19.04.2014. The learned Single Judge taking note of the material available on record and the affidavit of the officer that the 5th respondent has secured 515 marks out of 625 marks and the appellant has scored 495 marks out of 625 marks and come to conclusion that the withdrawal of the appointment of the 5th respondent is bad in law and proceeded to quash the same. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the present appeal is filed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 3. Sri. Varun Patil, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge has committed error in quashing the impugned order dated 18.07.2022 issued by 2nd respondent without appreciating the other aspects of the case. It is submitted that the appellant has raised objections to the appointment of 5th respondent as Anganawadi worker on the ground that the application submitted by the 5th respondent at Annexure-B indicates that she had obtained the residential certificate on 30.07.2021. However, actual certificate of residence found at Annexure-F is dated 17.08.2021, which is in clear violation of the Government Order dated 19.04.2014 and the guidelines issued for the appointment of Anganawadi workers. Admittedly, the residential certificate is issued subsequent to the date of application. Hence, the 5th respondent is not eligible to be considered for appointment as Anganawadi worker. It is further submitted that, the authority has withdrawn her appointment vide order dated 18.07.2022 only on the ground of marks secured by the candidate without considering other objections raised by - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 the appellant. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal by setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge by permitting the appellant to continue in the said post. 4. Per contra, Sri. Huleppa Heroor, learned counsel for the 5th respondent supports the order of the learned Single Judge and submits that the 2nd respondent withdrew the appointment of 5th respondent as Angawadi worker after the period of 9 months of her appointment and without providing any opportunity of hearing to her. It is submitted that the affidavit filed by the Government clearly indicate that the 5th respondent is more meritorious than the appellant. Hence, the learned Single Judge has come to the conclusion that the impugned order dated 18.07.2022 is liable to be quashed and further directed to reinstate the 5th respondent to the said post. Hence, the order under challenge does not call for any interference and he seeks to dismiss the appeal. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 5. Sri. Mallikarjun Basareddy, learned Government Advocate fairly submits that the respondent No.5 is more meritorious than the appellant herein and to support the said contention he has filed the affidavit of Sri. Prakasha S., Under Secretary to the Government, School Education and Literacy (Department), Secondary (Section) Government of Karnataka. It is submitted that the appellant though raised the objection to the appointment of 5th respondent as Anganawadi worker on different grounds before the authority, the authority has taken note of the secured marks and passed an order dated 18.07.2022 at Annexure-M. Hence, it would be appropriate to issue directions to the respondent-authorities to reconsider the appointment of Anganawadi worker to Tadapalli Village, Anganawadi Centre-2, Bidar Taluk and District afresh as per the prevailing guidelines. 6. We have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for respondent No.5 and the learned Government Advocate and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced and the material available on record. 7. The pleading and evidence on record indicate that the 5th respondent filed an application for the post of Anganawadi helper at Tadapalli Village, Anganawadi Centre-2, Bidar Taluk and District. The 5th respondent was issued with an appointment order dated 25.10.2021 at Annexure-G by the 2nd respondent, she joined duties as Anganawadi worker on 27.10.2021. Later, the 2nd respondent issued order dated 18.07.2022 withdrawing the appointment order of 5th respondent as Anganawadi helper on the ground that the selection committee has taken decision to withdraw her appointment. The order dated 18.07.2022 was impugned before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has taken note of the affidavit filed by the competent officer that the 5th respondent has scored 515 marks out of 625 marks and the appellant has scored 495 marks out of 625 marks in - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 the 9th standard examination and proceeded to quash the order dated 18.07.2022 and further directed to reinstate the 5th respondent to the post of Anganawadi helper. 8. The affidavit filed by Sri. Prakasha S., dated 03.03.2025 in these proceedings also indicate that the 5th respondent has scored 515 marks out of 625 marks and the appellant has scored 495 marks out of 625 marks in 9th standard examination. As per the guidelines, the 5th respondent is more meritorious and secured more marks than the appellant in the qualifying examination i.e., 9th standard. However, the appellant has specifically raised an objection before the authority that the application of the 5th respondent is liable to be rejected on the ground that the same is in violation of the guidelines issued by the respondents for appointment of Anganawadi helper. In other words, the appellant is contending that the 5th respondent in her application at Annexure-B indicated the date of obtaining the residential certificate as 30.07.2021. However, the residential certificate at Annexure-F is dated - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 17.08.2021 which is subsequent to the date of application of the 5th respondent and the authority without considering this aspect has considered inter-se merit of marks in 9th standard examination and passed an order dated 18.07.2022. 9. We have also perused the grounds of appeal and the objection filed before the authority. The appellant has taken specific ground in the appeal that the 5th respondent is not eligible to be appointed as Anganawadi helper as her residential certificate is subsequently obtained and this aspect is required to be considered by the competent authority, who selects the Anganawadi helper. 10. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered view that, insofar as passing of the order dated 18.07.2022 has been rightly interfered by the learned Single Judge on the ground of inter-se merit between the appellant and the 5th respondent. However, the authority - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 is required to reconsider whether that the application of the 5th respondent is in accordance with guidelines in force. In view of the specific objections of the appellant with regard to the residential certificate of the 5th respondent, the interest of the justice would be met, if respondents No. 2 to 4 are directed to reconsider the applications of the appellant and the 5th respondent to the post of Anganawadi helper at Tadapalli Village, Anganawadi Centre-2, Bidar Taluk and District in accordance with law and as per the guidelines. Hence, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The writ appeal is allowed in part. ii) The order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.08.2023 passed in WP.No.202122/2022 is upheld insofar as the quashing of the impugned order dated 18.07.2022 at Annexure-M. Further we direct the respondents No.2 to 4 to - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1425-DB WA No. 200116 of 2023 reconsider the applications of the appellant and respondent No.5 afresh in accordance with law keeping in mind the observations made supra and pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. iii) The appellant is permitted to continue to work as Anganawadi helper at Tadapalli Village, Anganawadi Centre-2, Bidar Taluk and District, till the authority takes decision in the matter as directed. iv) No orders to cost. Sd/- (K NATARAJAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE MCR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16 CT: PS