'.a ■ ^ APHC010295222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATi WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 715 OF 2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal preferred against the order dated 27.11.2024 in W.P.No. 46708 of 2016 on the file of the High Court. Between: Appikonda Padma, W/o. V. Shiva, Aged about 39 years, Occ. House Wife, Tamarada Village, Bazar Street, Kirlampudi Mandal, East Godavari District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary, Women and Child Welfare Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Collector cum Chairman, ICDS, Project, Kakinada, East Godavari District - 533001. 3. The Project Director, Women and Child Welfare Department, ICDS, Projects, Kakinada, East Godavari District - 533001. 4. The Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Peddapuram, East Godavari District - 533001 5. 5. Mogga Karuna Jyothi, W/o. G. Ratnam Raju, Aged about 32 years, Occ. House Wife, Yarravaram Village, Panchyath Street, Yeleswaram (Respondent No.5 / Petitioner No. 1 Mandal, East Godavari District, is formal party not necessary party to this Appeal) ...Respondents lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the order dated 27.11.2024 passed by the Learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 46708 of 2016 pending disposal of the writ appeal. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K V SESHAGIRI RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following JUDGMENT APHC010295222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3526] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT APPEAL NO: 715 OF 2025 Between: 1.APPIKONDA PADMA, W/0. V, SHIVA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE, TAMARADA VILLAGE, BAZAR STREET, KIRLAMPUDI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI PRADESH. GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, ICDS, PROJECT, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT - 533001. 3.THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT, ICDS, PROJECTS, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-533001. 4.THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, ICDS PROJECT PEDDAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT - 533001 2 1 5.M0GGA KARUNA JYOTHl, W/0. G. RATNAM RAJU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. OCC. HOUSE WIFE, YARRAVARAM VILLAGE, PANCHYATH STREET, YELESWARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. » (RESPONDENT N0.5 / PETITIONER NO. 1 IS FORMAL PARTY NOT NECESSARY PARTY TO THIS APPEAL) ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant: 1.KVSESHAGIRI RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE \ i I \ / ? » ik 3 The Court made the following JUDGMENT: The appellant, one of the writ petitioners in W.P.No.46708 of 2016, aggrieved by an order dated 27.11.2024 of the learned Single Judge in not granting the relief sought for, filed the present Writ Appeal. 2) Pursuant to a Notification dated 22.01.2016 issued by the Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Peddapuram-4*'^ respondent for filling up of the vacancies of Anganwadi Assistants, the Appellant applied to the said post at Tamarada-1 of Kirlampudi Mandal, whereas the 5*^ respondent applied to the post of Anganwadi Assistant at Yarravaram Village- 1 in Yeleswaram Mandal. After scrutiny of the applications, call letters issued to the appellant and the 5‘^ respondent to attend the interview 14.03.2016. According to the appellant and the 5*'' respondent, they are the ^ only candidates for the respective posts applied by them, but were not appointed in the said posts and as such were constrained to file W.P.No.46708of2016. were on 3) Before the learned Single Judge no counter affidavit was filed by the respondent authorities. However, a copy of the letter dated 22.11.2024 addressed by the District Women and Child Welfare Empowerment Officer, Kakinada to the learned Government Pleader was placed, wherein it was mentioned to the effect that the appellant failed to attend the interview which was held on 14.03.2016 as per the records available in the office of ICDS, ^ Peddapuram and enquiry report of CDPO, Rajanagaram, dated 21.03.2017. 4 The learned Judge taking the said letter into account, wherein it is also stated that the 5^^ respondent had attended the interview held on 14.03.2016, allowed the Writ Petition partly in her favour. The learned Judge rejected the plea that it is for the authorities to prove that the appellant - petitioner has failed to attend the interview on 14.03.2016 and opined having filed the writ petition, the burden of proof lies on her and the same should .not be shifted on to the authorities. The learned Judge also placed reliance on the decision in Nirtubai w/o Jayantilal Mahule v Head Master, Higher Grade Marathi Giris School, Gondia and Others\ wherein it was inter alia held that the burden to establish the fact as to whether the relationship of “employer and employee” has been established or not, lies upon the employee. Learned counsel for the appellant made submissions with reference to the grounds raised in the appeal and the material on record including the call letter dated 10.03.2016. He submits that the learned Single Judge is not justified in not granting relief to the appellant, more particularly in the absence of any material / documents / register to establish that the appellant did not attend the interview on 14.03.2016. It is his specific contention that in fact the appellant attended the interview conducted by the 4^^ respondent 14.03.206, that she was the only applicant for the post of Anganwadi Assistant at Tamarada-1 village and with a view to favour an employee who is working on contract basis, the authorities under the influence of higher officials portrayed as if the appellant did not attend the interview on the scheduled 4) on 2014 see Online Bom 1590 5 dated i.e., 14.03.2016. He contended that the learned Judge went placing burden on the appellant to establish that she attended the interview, instead of directing the authorities to* place the relevant records pertaining to the interviews conducted for the posts in question. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents made submission to sustain the order under challenge. He placed reliance on the letter dated 22.11.2024 on the basis of which the learned Single Judge denied relief to the appellant. This Court having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and noting that the matter was disposed of on the basis of letter dated 22.11.2024 referred to above, in the absence of a counter affidavit filed by the authorities, vide Order dated 30.06.2025 directed production of records. On 11.07.2025, the 4'^ respondent attended the Court and furnished the photocopies of some documents along with a Memo dated 13.03.2017 of .the Project Director (FAC), District Women and Child Development Agency, calling for a report from CDPO, ICDS Project, Rajanagaram, on the complaints made with regard to recruitment process and the report dated 21.03.2017 submitted pursuant to the said memo. 23.07.2025, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 attended the Court and a copy of the letter dated 15.07.2025 addressed by the 4**^ respondent to the learned Government Pleader, Women Development and Child Welfare, Social Welfare (Non-Service) is placed for perusal of this Court. On the basis of the said wrong in 5) 6) On letter, the learned Government Pleader reiterated his submissions that as the appellant failed to attend the interview on 14.03.2016, she was not appointed as Anganwadi Assistant at Tamarada-I Anganwadi at Tamarada Village, that there is no vacancy as one Smt.J.Krupa Rani,' is working on temporary / conditional basis pursuant to proceedings dated 23.06.2013. This Court has considered the material / record- placed by the respondent authorities. At the outset, it may be pertinent to note that the respondents except basing on the report of CDPO dated 21.03.2017 has not produced any documents pertaining to conduct of interviews on 14.03.2016, much less the registers recording the attendance of the candidates. Even the said report dated 21.03.2017 is vague and in fact it was submitted only after filing of the above mentioned W.p;No.46708 of 2016 by the appellant and another. From a perusal of the said report, it is discernable that the CDPO, ICDS has not conducted any enquiry worth mentioning by looking into the relevant Registers / attendance sheets, if any maintained by1he authorities in respect of the interview held on 14.03.2016, much less by enquiring the CDPO, ICDS Project, Peddapuram, who issued the call letter dated 10.03.2016. It may also be pertinent to note that before submitting the said report dated 21.03.2017, no opportunity appears to have been afforded to the applicant / appellant herein. Even as per the letter dated 15.07.2025, original records were available, except the said report dated 21.03.2017. 7) no L t. 7 Jiv' 8) In the light of the above stated position, the report dated 21.03.2017, in the absence of any supporting material and submitted without due opportunity to the appellant cannot be given much credence, though the veracity of the said report is not the subject matter of the writ petition. In fact, the learned single Judge in the absence of any material / record ought not to have denied the relief to the appellant only merely on the basis of the letter dated 22.11.2024 wherein a reference to the said report dated 21.03.2007 was made. Be that as it may. From a perusal of the communication dated 15.07.2025 referred to ^ supra, one Smt. J. Krupa Rani is working as Anganwadi Assistant in - Tamarada-I from 26.03.2013 on temporary basis and she is not a party to the present proceedings. While any order without hearing her may not be appropriate, on a query by this Court the respondent Nod.3 and 4, who attended the present proceedings stated that there is a vacancy of Anganwadi Helper at Tamarada-1 Anganwadi and the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the case of the appellant may at least be considered for the / 9) said post. 10) In view of the said submission, this Court while is of the opinion that no significance may be attached to the report dated 21.03.2017, in the interest of justice, deems it appropriate to dispose of the appeal with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the appellant for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Helper at Tamarada-1 Anganwadi center without reference to 8 the report dated 21.03.2017 appropriate orders, within a period of four weeks from copy of this order. The Writ Appeal is disposed of accordingly, No order as to costs. 12) Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications stand closed. expeditiously as possible and issue the date of receipt of a as 11) with the above directions. pendrng, if any, shall Sd/- V.DIWAKAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The Secretary, Women and Child Welfare Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.[By RPAD] 2. The District Collector cum Chairman, ICDS, Project, Kakinada, East Godavari District - 533001. .[By RPAD] 3. The Project Director, Women and Child Welfare Department, ICDS, Projects, Kakinada, East Godavari District - 533001. .[By RPAD] 4. The Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, Peddapuram, East Godavari District - 533001.[By RPAD] 5. One CC to Sri. K V Seshagiri Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP For Women and Child Welfare, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies. AL 'i HIGH COURT TL DATED:23/07/2025 JUDGMENT WA NO. 715 OF 2025 I DISPOSING OF THE W.A. WITHOUT COSTS