Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010121012025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3758/2025 EPTIKAR BEGUM W/O AKINUR SHEIKH, R/O VILL- SINGIMAARI (GHOMAT), P.O.- SHAKTI ASHRAM, DIST- KOKRAJHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783345 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:B.T.R. RECOMMENDED BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE MEMBER BTR KOKRAJHAR PIN-783370 3:EXECUTE MEMBER SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT BTR KOKRAJHAR PIN-783370 4:THE SECRETARY BTR KOKRAJHAR PIN-783370 5:DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER KOKRAJHAR PIN-783370 6:CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER Page No.# 2/3 DOTMA ICDS PROJECT PIN-783370 7:REJINA BEGUM W/O SOFIQUL RAHMAN R/O VILL- SINGIMARI P.O.- SHAKTI ASHRAM P.S.- FAKIRAGRAM DIST- KOKRAJHAR PIN-78334 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M RANA, MR. A ISLAM,MR. M A MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, B HAZARIKA,T TALUKDAR,MR. R ISLAM,SC, BTC BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER 10/11/2025 Heard Mr. M A Mondal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. R Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ms. B Bhuyan, learned Standing counsel, BTC for the respondent Nos. 2 to 6. Also heard Mr. R Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7. 2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present writ petition has assailed the selection and appointment of the respondent No. 7 as Angawandi Worker in Singimari (Ghomat) Anganwadi Center. 3. The petitioner contends that the respondent No. 7, herein, was not entitled to be selected and appointed as Anganwadi Worker for Singimari (Ghomat) Anganwadi Center, inasmuch as, she resides beyond the coverage area of the said Anganwadi Center. 4. Mr. R Islam, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 disputes the said position and submits that the selection of the petitioner, herein, was made by the respondent authorities after due verification of her residential status. Page No.# 3/3 5. In view of the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, a disputed question of fact having arisen in the matter, this Court is of the considered view that the same would not be permissible to be so decided basing on the affidavits filed by the parties to the proceeding. 6. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the issue arising in the present writ petition would require a factual determination and the same be made at the first instance by the departmental authorities. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a representation raising his claim with regard to the ineligibility of the respondent No. 7, herein, for being appointed as Anganwadi Worker of Singimari (Ghomat) Anganwadi Center before the Joint Director, Women and Child Development, BTC, within a period of 30 (Thirty) days from today. On receipt of such representation from the petitioner, herein, the Joint Director, Women and Child Development, BTC shall schedule a date for hearing and issue notices in the matter to the petitioner, the respondent No. 7 and others concerned. Thereafter, on hearing the petitioner, the respondent No. 7 and others, the Joint Director, Women and Child Development, BTC shall dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner, herein, by way of a speaking order. 8. The selection and appointment of the respondent No. 7 shall be subject to such order that would now be passed by the Joint Director, Women and Child Development, BTC, upon hearing the parties to the proceedings. 9. With the above observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant