1 2026:CGHC:6355 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2783 of 2023 Smt. Jyoti Singh W/o Shri Rajendra Singh Aged About 34 Years Resident Of Village- Jharnapara, Tahsil - Baikunthpur, District : Korea C.G. ... Petitioner. versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Commissioner Surguja Division, Ambikapur, District : Surguja Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector Korea, Baikunthpur, District : Koriya Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Project Officer Integrated Child Development Service Project, Baikunthpur, District : Koriya Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Baikunthpur, District : Koriya Chhattisgarh. 6 - The Block Education Officer Baikunthpur, District : Koriya Chhattisgarh. AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.02.13 10:09:27 +0530 2 7 - The Chairman (Sabhapati) Child Development, Janpad Panchayat, Baikunthpur, District : Koriya Chhattisgarh. 8 - Smt. Anjani Sarthi W/o Rajendra Prasad Sarthi R/o Juna Para, Ward No. 16, Nagar Palika Parishad Area, Baikunthpur, Tahsil - Baikunthpur, District : Koriya , Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents. For Petitioner : Shri Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Shri Hrishikesh Sharma, PL. For Respondent No.8 : Shri Sanjay Pathak, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 04/02/2026 1. Challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 08.02.2023 passed by Respondent No.2 in Panchayat Appeal Case No.202111960100022/B-121/2021-22, whereby Respondent No.2 has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant/petitioner herein and affirmed the order dated 28.10.2021 passed by Respondent No.3 (Annexure P/7). 2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/ order, thereby setting- aside/ quashing the impugned order dated 08.02.2023 Annexure P/1 and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to issue appointment order in favour of petitioner on the post of Anganbadi Worker for Anganbadi Centre, Jharnapra, Tahsil-Baikunthpur, District-Korea being 3 meritorious candidate, in accordance with law. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given. 3. By the order impugned, appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and the order passed by the Respondent No.3 was affirmed by which, prayer of the petitioner for cancellation of evaluation chart prepared by the selection committee had been rejected. 4. Necessary facts of the case are that the respondent authority issued an advertisement for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker for Anganbadi Centre, Jharnapara, Janpad Panchayat, Baikunthpur. It is submitted that the State Government has issued guidelines/ rules dated 02.04.2008 for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker and in Clause 1.5 of the guidelines, it is specifically prescribed that the candidate must be the resident of particular Gram Panchayat and the candidate must be submit the residential proof certificate issued with joint signature of Sarpanch and Secretary of concerned Gram Panchayat. That, the petitioner who is having 10 years experience on the post of Anganbadi Assistant and being permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara, duly applied for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker at Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara along with all eligibility documents. It is noteworthy to mention here that the 4 respondent no. 8 is the permanent resident of Juna Para, Nagar Palika Ward No. 16, Baikunthpur, which is evident from the Adhar Card, Voter List, list of Ration Card Holder of Ward No. 16, Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru Ward, Baikunthpur and the certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara. That, the said respondent no. 8 is not the permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara, therefore she is not eligible for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker for Anganbadi Centre, Jharnapara, despite this, she applied for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker at Anganbadi Centre, Jharnapara. That, after scrutiny of applications of candidates and documents submitted by them, the evaluation committee issued evaluation chart, whereby the respondent no. 8 was placed at first place by securing total 39.04 marks, whereas the name of petitioner was placed at serial no. 3 by showing her total marks as 32.04 and further no marks has been given to the petitioner for living below poverty line, whereas the petitioner is living below poverty line and further despite the respondent no. 8 is not permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara, despite this, she was not declared ineligible and she has been placed at the first place in the evaluation of chart. The petitioner raised an objection before the selection committee to the effect that the respondent no. 8 is not the permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara, therefore she is not eligible for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker and she be declared ineligible. After deciding the objection of petitioner, the 5 selection committee again declared the respondent no. 8 as eligible for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker of Gram Panchayat Jharnapara. It is noteworthy to mention here that earlier in the year 2018, the respondent authorities initiated process for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker for Anganbadi Centre Jharnapara and the petitioner as well as respondent no. 8 were participated in the selection process and after scrutiny of documents, the evaluation chart was issued, in which, the respondent no. 8 was placed at first place by declaring her eligible. The petitioner filed objection before the selection committee to the effect that the respondent no. 8 is not permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara, therefore she is not eligible and by considering the objection of the petitioner, the selection committee has issued fresh evaluation chart, whereby declared the respondent no. 8 as not eligible on the ground that she is not the resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara for recruitment process initiated in the year 2018. However, subsequently the said selection process initiated in the year 2018 was cancelled. Being aggrieved with the decision of declaring the respondent no. 8 as eligible for the appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker for the recruitment process initiated in the year 2020-21, the petitioner moved an application before the Collector, Korea for cancellation of evaluation chart prepared by the selection committee. On the basis of application of petitioner, the Collector has registered Panchayat Appeal Case No. 6 202102010100000/B-121/2020-21. It is noteworthy to mention here that during pendency of appeal before the Collector, the petitioner filed written argument, in which, it is specifically submitted that the respondent no. 8 was declared as ineligible for selection process initiated in the year 2018 on the ground that she is not the permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara. After hearing both the parties, vide order dated 28.10.2021, the Collector, Korea has dismissed the appeal by the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the order dated 28.10.2021 the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (respondent no. 2) and vide impugned order dated 08.02.2023, Respondent No.2 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order passed by the Collector. Hence this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that State Government has issued guidelines/rules dated 02.04.2008 for appointment on the post of Anganbadi worker and in clause 1.5 of the said guidelines, it has been specifically prescribed that the candidate must be the resident of that particular gram panchyat in which post is vacant or Anganbadi centre is proposed to open and the candidate must submit residential proof certificate issued with joint signature of Sarpanch and Secretary of the concerned Gram Panchayat. However, Respondent No.8 is permanent resident of Juna Para, Nagar Palika Ward No.16, Baikunthpur which is evident from Adhar card, voter list, list of ration card holder of Ward No.16, Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru Ward, Baikunthpur and the 7 certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat Jharnapara. Since Respondent No.8 is not the permanent resident of Gram Panchayat Jharnapara, she is not eligible for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker for Anganbadi Centre, Jharnapara. Despite of which, she applied for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker at Anganbadi Centre, Jharnapara. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the evaluation chart issued by the evaluation committee, Respondent No.8 has been placed at the first place who secured total 39.04 marks, whereas name of the petitioner was placed at Serial No.3 who secured total 32.04 marks but the petitioner has not been awarded marks as she is living below poverty line which entitles her to get 6 marks. However, Respondent No.8 who is not the permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara has not been declared as ineligible and has been placed at the first place in the evaluation chart. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that earlier in the year 2018, respondent authorities initiated process for appointment on the post of Anganbadi Worker for Anganbadi Centre, Jharnapara, in which, petitioner as well as Respondent No.8 participated and after scrutiny of documents, evaluation chart was issued and Respondent No.8 was placed at the first place by declaring her eligible. The petitioner filed objection before the select committee to the effect that Respondent No.8 is not permanent resident of Gram Panchayat, Jharnapara and as such, 8 she is not eligible. Thereafter, select committee issued fresh evaluation chart (Annexure P/5) and declared Respondent No.8 as not eligible on the ground that she is not permanent resident of Gram Panchayat Jharnapara for recruitment process initiated in the year 2018. However, the said selection process initiated in the year 2018 was cancelled subsequently. 8. Though during the course of hearing, Mr Sanjay Pathak, counsel for Respondent No.8 was not present, however, later on, after the arguments are over, he appeared before this Court and prayed that he may be allowed to file written submissions. 9. On due consideration, the prayer is allowed and Mr. Sanjay Pathak, counsel for Respondent No.8 is allowed to file written submission. The same is taken on record. 10.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available with the petition. 11.From the perusal of the record, it appears that Respondent No.8 was appointed on the post of Angan Badi Karyakarta for village Jharnapara, tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh. Respondent No.8 being eligible in all respect has been appointed as Angan Badi Karyakarta and the candidature of the petitioner has been rejected holding that she has not obtained the requisite marks i.e. more than that of Respondent No.8. Total marks obtained by the petitioner after taking into consideration the Higher Secondary certificate and 6 marks for experience as Angan Badi Sahaika was 32.04 whereas, Respondent No.8 has 9 secured 39.04 marks including 10 additional marks for belonging to Schedule Castes/Tribes category. The Collector, Korea, Baikunthpur C.G. dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner holding that there is no illegality and perversity in awarding of marks. The petitioner has objected the candidature of the Respondent No.8 stating that she is not the resident of village Jharnapara, however, from the perusal of the residential certificate issued by Naib Tehsildar, Baikunthpur District Korea dated 20.03.2007, it appears that Respondent No.8 belongs to the village Jharnapara. Being aggrieved with the order dated 28.10.2021 passed by Collector, Korea Baikunthpur, petitioner preferred appeal before learned Commissioner, Surguja Division, Ambikapur C.G who has also confirmed the order of Collector Korea Baikunthpur and rejected the appeal preferred by the petitioner stating that no illegality or perversity or procedural irregularity has been made out either in the selection process or in the appointment of Respondent No.8. The Respondent No.8 has well established that she is resident of village Jharnapara on the basis of copies of the elector photo identity card, Domicile certificate, voter identity card of her husband, voter identity card of her father in law, her aadhar card, aadhar card of her husband, aadhar card of her father in law and other documents like Khasra/B1 in respect of revenue records. Thus, from all angles, Respondent No.8 was found to be the resident of village Jharnapara and there is concurrent finding by the respondent 10 authorities holding the petitioner to be unsuccessful in establishing her claim and as such, petitioner has failed to make out any ground for interference in the aforesaid concurrent finding arrived by the courts below. 12.The appointment process under challenge has been examined by competent authorities at more than one level, and both the authorities have found the selection of the candidate to be fair, legal and in accordance with the applicable rules. It is a settled position of law that the scope of judicial interference in matters of selection and appointment is very limited. Unless a serious illegality, perversity or material infirmity is shown, the decision of appropriate authorities cannot be interfered with. 13.For the reasons mentioned above, this Court is of the view that reasons assigned by the Collector Korea Baikunthpur and the Commissioner, Surguja Division Ambikapur C.G. is cogent and reliable and as such, there is nothing on record to show that any perversity or illegality has been committed while appointing Respondent No.8 as Angan Badi Karyakarta as Respondent No.8 has also secured higher marks than that of the petitioner and Respondent No.8 is still working as a Angan Badi karyakarta and as such, this Writ Petition being devoid of merits is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Avinash