H I G H C O U R T O F J A M M U & K A S H M I R A N D L A D A K H HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case No:- SWP (C) No. 576/2006 AnuCharak …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. S. C Mansotra, Advocate Vs 1. Director Social Welfare Deptt. 2. Programme Officer, ICDS Chairman Selection Committee, District Doda. 3. Child Development Project Officer, Member Secretary, Distt. Doda. 4. District Social Welfare Officer, District Doda( Member). 5. Krishna Devi W/0 Rattan Singh R/o Village Sherkhand, BPO. BhagwahTeshil and District Doda. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Palvi Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Rarvinder Gupta, AAG Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE ORDER(ORAL) 08.05.2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner herein has prayed following relief :- 2. The aforesaid relief has been prayed on the premises that petitioner applied has been challenged select list and engagement as Anganwari Worker as Anganwari Centre SiswarBhagwah, Tehsil and District Doda advertised vide advertisement notice dated 17.02.2005 possessed matriculation qualification as also respondents located, wherein the Anganwari Center in question was sanctioned and that respondent no. 5 as well as for the selection and engagement as AnganwariWorker though belonging to the different villages that the respondents Nos. 2 to 4 in violation of norms of selection selected Sr. No. 28 2 respondent no. 5 as against the petitioner for engagement as Anganwari Center in question which select came to be objective by the petitioner by submitting detailed objections and received by the respondents on 06.02.2006. 3. The petitioner has maintained the instant writ petition primilarly on the ground that the private respondent No. 5 came to be selected by the official respondents as Anganwari center in question despite the fact that the said respondent did not belonging to the village/HalqaPanchyat wherein the Anganwari Center came to be sanctioned. 4. The respondents be official or private respondents despite having enter and have not chosen to file objections to the petition. 5. Heard learned counsel for the and official respondents as well as record produced by the official respondents. 6. Perusal of the record produced by the official respondent would reveal that admittedly Anganwari Center in question did not sanctioned for Village/Center Siswar of Panchyat allow Bhagwah and besides the petitioner and respondent no. 5 herein Anita Devi and Radha Devi have had applied for selection and engagement as Anganwari for Anganwari Center --------- and the proposed select list drawn and framed by the official respondents that reveals that the petitioner herein ----------- total 3.21 point as one of the basis of the qualification whereas the private respondents have been given 37.69 points with rest of the other above namely candidate ---- also upon 31.50 and 33.29 points respectively on the basis of their weightage given to their basic qualification, record would also reveals that the respondent No. 5 has been engaged pursuant to the engagement order dated 19.07.2006 upon receipt of the select dated 3 25.11.2025. Admittedly the said engagement order is not challenge in the instant petition. Further perusal of the aforesaid record produced by the respondents would reveal that both the petitioner as well as respondent no. 5 herein are residence of village Bhagwa reflect in their respective permanent residence Certificate (PRC). It is also emerged from the record that petitioner as well as respondent no. 5 herein have passed matriculation examination in order 1996 and 1998 respectively and the petitioner has secured 184 out of 500, whereas private respondent no. 5 is also secured 335 out of 750 and on the basis of qualification of the said more obtained by the petitioner as well as respondent 5 herein, the official respondents have drawn the total points possed upon the weightegh to the said matriculation qualification and both the petitioner and respondents No. 5. In view of the position obtaining in the matter by the official respondents simultenosuley have undertaken the process of selection have making and engament as Anganwari Center ----------------- fairly having been considered both the petitioner not only petitioner herein respondent no. 5 and other above mentioned candidate and have seemingly rightly select and appoint respondent no. 5 herein. As petition thus found without any merit dismissed notwithstanding the fact that petitioner has not have been called in question the order of engagement respondent no. 5 herein. Record produced by the official respondents returned back in the open Court. Dismissed. 4 (Javed Iqbal Wani) Judge Jammu 08.05.2025 Javid Iqbal