1 CGHC010174532018 2026:CGHC:34752 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3979 of 2018  Smt. Mamta Maravi W/o Jayram Singh, Aged About 33 Years R/o Kotariyadad, Tahsil Pendraroad, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Women And Child Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. The Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. The Additional Collector, Pendraroad, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4. The Project Officer, Women And Child Development, Gourela, Tahsil Pendraroad, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Gourela, Tahsil Pendraroad, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 6. Smt. Budh Kunwar W/o Laxman Singh, R/o Anjani, Tahsil Pendraroad, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 7. Smt. Durgesh Bai W/o Vishram Singh, R/o Kotariyabad, Tahsil Pendraroad, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate For State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, P.L. 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 7.8.2026 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records of the case of the petitioner from the respondent authority. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropraite writ thereby setting aside the the impugned order dated 30.03.2015 Annexure P/1. 10.3 Any other relief which may dcts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petittiion may be given. 10.4 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside /quash the impugned order dated 24.08.2018 (Annexure P-8.) 2) Facts of the present case are that Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Gourela issued an advertisement to fill up the vacant post of Anganwadi Worker at Centre Kotariyadad in the year 2010. According to advertisement, the candidate must be resident of the same village. Petitioner, respondents No. 6 & 7 and other eligible candidates applied for the said post and submitted relevant documents. Selection Committee scrutinized the documents and prepared merit list wherein Smt. Budh Kunwar (respondent No. 6), petitioner and Smt. Durgesh Bai (respondent No. 7) were at S. Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively. 3) Candidature of Smt. Budh Kunwar was rejected on the ground 3 that she was not resident of Village Kotariyadad and names of petitioner and Smt. Durgesh Bai were recommended for the said post. General body meeting of Janpad Panchayat, Gourela was convened on 17.2.2011 wherein name of petitioner was recommended for appointment and name of Smt. Durgesh Bai was kept in Wait List. Order of appointment was issued in favor of petitioner on 21.2.2011. 4) Smt. Budh Kuwar and Smt. Durgesh Bai assailed the appointment order before the Collector, Bilaspur, who canceled the appointment of petitioner vide order dated 25.3.2013 and remitted the matter to Selection Committee to prepare a fresh merit list strictly in accordance with the guidelines regarding recruitment of Anganwadi Workers. Petitioner preferred revision before Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, which was dismissed vide order dated 30.3.2015 on the ground that petitioner was not a bonafide resident of Village Kotariyadad on the particular date. Subsequently, selection committee prepared a fresh merit list and Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Gourela issued appointment order in favor of Smt. Budh Kuwar on 24.8.2018. 5) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a permanent resident of Village Kotariyadad and this fact was not considered either by the Collector, Bilaspur or Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division while passing the orders impugned. He further submits that Selection Committee had issued 4 order of appointment in favor of petitioner after due verification of documents therefore the order of appointment issued in favor of Smt. Budh Kuwar dated 24.8.2018 is bad in law. He prays to allow this petition. 6) On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that there are concurrent findings of fact recorded by Collector, Bilaspur and Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division to the effect that petitioner is not a bona-fide resident of Village Kotariyadad. He further submits that petitioner has not placed a single document on record to demonstrate her residency therefore this petition deserves to be dismissed. 7) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8) Admittedly, selection committee prepared a merit list after scrutiny of documents wherein Smt. Budh Kunwar, petitioner and Smt. Durgesh Bai were at S. Nos.1, 2 and 3 respectively. Subsequently, candidature of Smt. Budh Kuwar was rejected on the ground that she was not a resident of Village Kotariyadad and name of petitioner was recommended for appointment and specific order in this regard was issued on 21.2.2011 by Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Gourela. 9) Smt. Budh Kuwar and Smt. Dugesh Bai assailed the appointment order on the ground that petitioner is not a bona-fide resident of Village Kotariyadad. Collector, Bilaspur and Additional Commissioner, 5 Bilaspur Division examined the facts and recorded findings to the effect that petitioner is not a resident of Village Kotariyadad and order of appointment issued in her favour is bad in law. 10) In this petition, petitioner has not placed a single document to substantiate that she is a resident of Village Kotariyadad. Guidelines regarding recruitment of Anganwadi Workers states that candidate has to submit certificate issued by the Sarpanch or Secretary of Gram Panchayat. It appears that no such certificate was submitted by the petitioner therefore the Collector as well as Additional Commissioner set aside the order of appointment issued in favor of petitioner. It is also provided in the scheme that in case of dispute with regard to residency, Tehsildar would be the final authority. Petitioner has not placed domicile certificate issued by the competent authority i.e. Tehsildar therefore the findings recorded by the Courts below do not require interference. Furthermore, Selection Committee revisited the matter and issued appointment order in favor of Smt. Budh Kuwar on 24.8.2018. 11) Having considered the above-discussed facts, in my considered view, no case is made out for interference. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.08.10 13:51:24 +0530