APHC010255932012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 38790/2012 Between: 1. GURRALA BUJJI,, W/O. DUPPADA SUR DI, AGE 22 YEARS, R/O.CHINNABHOGILI VILLAGE, SEETHANAGARAM MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WOMEN AND CHILD, WELFARE DEVELOPMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECTTTARY, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 4. THE PROJECT OFFICER I C D S PROJECT, BOBBILI RURAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 5. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER CDPO, BOBBILI RURAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 6. SMT KILLADA ANURADHA, W/O.POTLURI MURALI, R/O.CHINNABHOGILI VILLAGE, SEETHANARAM MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declaring the action of the respondents in appointing the 6th respondent as Anganwadi Teacher to Chinnabhogili Anganwadi Centre-IV, Seethanagaram Mandal, Vizianagaram District, in the place of the petitioner vide Proceeding No.25/2012 (39), dt.19.03.2012 issued by the 5th respondent, as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of Art.14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the statement dt.21.05.2012 issued by the 5th respondent and consequently set-aside the Proceeding No.25/2012 (39), dt.19.03.2012 issued by the 5th respondent and appoint the petitioner in place of 6th respondent and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP 49207 OF 2012 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 Proceeding No.25/2012 (39), dt.19.03.2012 issued by the 5th respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KRISHNA RAO MODHALAVALASA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR WOMEN DEV, CHILD WELFARE 3. KURITI BHASKARA RAO The Court made the following: ORDER Heard Sri K.Sai Ravindranath, learned counsel representing Sri M.Krishna Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Ramakrishna, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women and Child Welfare for respondents 1, 4 and 5. 2. Assailing the proceeding No.25/2012(39), dated 19.03.2012, issued by the 4th respondent appointing the 6th respondent as Anganwadi Worker at Chinnabhogili-IV, the above writ petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner belongs to the SC-Mala community, and she applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker. Thereafter, the petitioner attended the interview. He would also submit that the 5th respondent issued, the statement of eligible candidates on 21.05.2012, wherein the petitioner’s name was shown at S.No.12. However, the 5th respondent appointed the 6th respondent as Anganwadi Worker by issuing the proceedings impugned. He would also submit that the 6th respondent secured fewer marks in matriculation than the petitioner and thus, the proceedings impugned are liable to be set aside. 4. A counter affidavit was filed by the 4th respondent, wherein it was contended, inter alia, that the 1st respondent issued a notification calling for applications from the eligible candidates for the post of Anganwadi Worker, Chinabhogili village, Seethanagaram Mandal, Vizianagaram District. Only 14 eligible candidates, including the petitioner and the 6th respondent, applied to the said post. The interview was conducted on 19.05.2011. Twelve candidates attended the interview, and 2 candidates were absent. The 5th respondent issued provisional appointment orders to the 6th respondent vide proceeding No.25/2012(39), dated 19.03.2012, as Anganwadi Worker, due to the order passed by the High Court in W.P.No.18697 of 2011. The highest marks in the tenth class are not the criteria for selection to the post of Anganwadi Worker. In the interview conducted by the selection committee, the 6th respondent secured 14 marks, whereas the petitioner secured 8 marks and eventually prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. As seen from the material available on record, the petitioner and 6th respondent, along with others, made applications for the post of Anganwadi Worker in Chinabhogili village, Seetanagaram Mandal, Vizianagaram District. Page 4 of 4 The petitioner secured 8 marks, whereas the 6th respondent secured 14 marks in the interview conducted by the selection committee on 19.05.2011. 6. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner secured more marks than the 6th respondent in matriculation, this Court is not persuaded by the same, since matriculation is a minimum qualification to make an application to the post of Anganwadi Worker, and the marks secured in the matriculation are not a decisive factor for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker. Since the 6th respondent secured more marks than the petitioner, this Court does not find any irregularity or illegality in the proceedings impugned. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is Dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI PVD