- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15401-DB WA No. 100540 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. WRIT APPEAL NO.100540 OF 2022 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. RESHMA W/O IMAMSAB KICHADI AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O GONAGAUR TOTA, POST. GONAGAUR, TQ. RAMDURGA, DIST. BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.B. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WOMAN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WOMAN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT, WELFARE DEPARTMENT, BELAGAVI. 3. THE SECRETARY, CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, ANGANAWADI WORKERS SELECTION COMMITTEE, RAMDURG, TQ. RAMDURGA, DIST. BELAGAVI. 4. HASINA AKRAMSAB SAYAD AGE. 23 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O GONAGNUR, TQ. RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 6/09/2022 IN WP NO.107731/2016 (S-RES), AND ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE SELECTION LIST OF RESPONDENT NO.4 DATED 18-02-2012 PASSED BY 2nd RESPONDENT Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.15 13:03:18 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15401-DB WA No. 100540 of 2022 UNDER NO.U.NI.BE/M.M.A.E/AUM. KAA.KA/GOU.SE.GU/11-12 VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND ORDER DATED 28-07-2016 PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT UNDER NO. U.NI.BE/M.M.A.E/AUM.KAA.KA/SELECTION/16-17 VIDE ANNEXURE-P AND TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS DATED 24-9-2011 AND 5-12-2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND G & ETC. THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT) This Writ Appeal by the petitioner is directed against order dated 6.9.2022 passed in WP No.107731/2016, whereunder her request to quash the appointment of respondent No.4 as Anganawadi Worker is rejected. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.S.B. Doddagoudar for the appellant and perused the entire writ appeal papers. 3. It is stated that respondent No.3 invited applications to fill-up the posts of Anganwadi Workers in various Anganwadi Centers at Ramdurg Taluk by notice dated 24.07.2010. One of the centers was, Gonaganur Thota Anganwadi Centre, which comes under Killa-Toragal Gram - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15401-DB WA No. 100540 of 2022 Panchayat in Ramdurg Taluk. The petitioner and respondent No.4 filed an application for the post of Anganwadi Worker. Respondent No.4 was selected and appointed as Anganwadi Worker to Gonaganur Thota Anganwadi Centre. Questioning the said order dated 18.02.2012, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned Single Judge on hearing the parties to the proceedings, under the impugned order, held that in the merit list respondent No.4 stood second and the petitioner stood third. Further, it is observed that respondent No.4 had applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker in terms of Annexure-R1 notice and thus rejected the petitioner’s contention that respondent No.4 had not filed application. 5. On hearing learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate, who has taken notice for respondents, we are of the considered view that no ground is made out to interfere with the learned Single Judge’s order. Learned Single Judge’s order is dated 06.09.2022, whereas, the present appeal was filed before the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15401-DB WA No. 100540 of 2022 Court on 22.09.2022. However, the office objections are complied after more than three years. It shows the interest of appellant in prosecuting the appeal. Be that as it may. 6. The appellant has not placed on record any material to establish that she is more meritorious than respondent No.4. Further, the contention that respondent No.4 had not filed application itself is rejected by the learned Single Judge. Moreover, Annexure-C produced by the petitioner herself indicates that respondent No.4 had made an application for appointment of Anganwadi Worker to Gonaganur Thota. 7. Thus, we do not find any merit in the writ appeal. Hence, the writ appeal stands rejected. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE JTR/Sh, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 4