1 2026:CGHC:15505 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3000 of 2026 1 - Babita Kumari Kashyap D/o Agasram Kashyap Aged About 23 Years R/o Ward No. 17, Block Jaijaipur, Village Maldakala, Tehsil Hasoud, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Programme Officer Integrated Child Development Services (Icds), District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Project Officer Integrated Child Development Programme, Sakti, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Nisha Kashyap D/o Ramgopall Kashyap R/o Village Maldakala, Block Jaijaipur, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate appears through Video Conferencing. For State/Respondents : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Govt. Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.04.07 17:23:08 +0530 2 Order on Board 06/04/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs : “1. Issue an appropriate writ/order/direction directing the respondents to produce the entire selection record along with the applicable rules and guidelines before this Hon'ble Court, and/or 2. Issue an appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the Impugned appointment order No 7163 dated 12.01.2026 (Annexure P/1) issued in favour of Respondent No.4 for the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta for Village Maldakala, District Sakti (C.G.). and/or 3. Issue an appropriate writ/order/direction directing the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner, being higher in merit, in accordance with law. and/or 4. Issue an appropriate writ/order/direction directing the respondents to decide the representation dated 24.02.2026 (Annexure P/6), of petitioner, giving her an opportunity of hearing, within a stipulated time frame and/or 5. Any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.” 2. Learned counsel for the respondent-State raised an objection regarding the maintainability of this writ petition, in view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner to challenge the appointment of private respondent No.4 as Anganwadi Karyakarta. 3. After arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to 3 take recourse to the alternative remedy available under law. 4. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as prayed for. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi