Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010264572025 2026:GAU-AS:6353 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6859/2025 NAJIMA BEGUM W/O AIBUL HOQUE, R/O.- VILL- TARANGAPUR, P.O. TULSHIBARI, P.S. LAKHIPUR, DIST- GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN- 783132. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 6. 2:THE DIRECTOR WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT ASSAM UZANBAZAR GHY- 1. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOALPARA ASSAM 4:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER GOALPARA ASSAM 5:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER JALESWAR ICDS PROJECT GOURNAGAR GOALPARA DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 6:THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR POST OF ANGANWADI HELPER UNDER JALESWAR ICDS PROJECT REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN GOURNAGAR GOALPARA ASSAM 7:THE JOINT DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES GOALPARA ASSAM 8:JOSHMINA KHATUN W/O ABIDUR RAHMAN R/O VILL.- TARANGAPUR P.O. TULSHIBARI P.S. LAKHIPUR DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783132 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD H R AHMED, MR J ISLAM,MR A MALEK Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, R KHA(R8),MS. P AHMED(R8),MR. M I HUSSAIN(R8) BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER 08/05/2026 Heard Mr. H R Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 6, Ms. D Borah, learned Standing counsel, Health & Family Welfare Department, appearing for the respondent No. 7 and Mr. M I Hussain, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 8. Page No.# 3/5 2. The petitioner, along with the respondent No. 8, herein, had applied for engagement as Anganwadi Helper in Paschim Tarangapur Tiniali Anganwadi Center, in pursuance to an advertisement dated 01.11.2024. Both the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 8, were shortlisted for appearing in the selection process. On conclusion of the selection process, the respondent authorities in the comparative statement so prepared, proceeded to show the respondent No. 8, herein, to be the candidate recommended for engagement as Anganwadi Helper in the said Anganwadi Center, on the ground that the respondent No. 8 was a person with physical disability. In the comparative statement so prepared, it is seen that it is the petitioner, who had secured the highest marks. 3. The petitioner, being aggrieved with the selection of the respondent No. 8 as an Anganwadi Helper, had approached the respondent authorities by way of filing a representation and therein, had questioned the disability certificate produced by the respondent No. 8 in the matter and had projected that the same was a fake one. 4. It is seen that thereafter, the matter was examined by the authorities and the matter, on being placed before the Joint Director, Health Services, Goalpara, it was clarified that there was no record maintained with regard to issuance of a disability certificate in the name of the respondent No. 8, vide registration No. 183/2021 dated 26.02.2021. The said position is further highlighted by the respondent No. 7, by way of filing an affidavit in the present matter, wherein, it has been also reiterated that the PWD Certificate produced by the respondent No. 8 is a fake one. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents has also not disputed the said position. Page No.# 4/5 6. In view of the above, the very basis for engagement of the respondent No. 8 as an Anganwadi Helper in pursuance to the advertisement dated 01.11.2024, having been found to be based on a forged document, the said appointment of the respondent No. 8 as an Anganwadi Helper in Paschim Tarangapur Tiniali Anganwadi Center shall not be permissible to be continued with, any further and accordingly, the said appointment stands interfered with. 7. The respondent authorities are at liberty now to proceed against the respondent No. 8 to recover the honorarium, as drawn by the respondent No. 8, in pursuance to being appointed as Anganwadi Helper in the said Anganwadi Center, basing on a forged document. In the event, the amount is not repaid by the respondent No. 8, it would be open to the departmental authorities to institute appropriate proceedings before the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for recovery of the said amount. 8. The appointment of the respondent No. 8, having been interfered with by this Court basing on the fact that she did not have the requisite eligibility criteria for being considered to be a candidate belonging to the PWD category, it is found that the said appointment of the respondent No. 8, stands interfered with effect from the initial date of her such engagement. 9. In view of the above, the petitioner being placed at Serial No. 1, in the connected selection process, the Director of Women & Child Development is directed to verify the said fact and in the event, the petitioner is found to have been recommended at Serial No. 1 by the selection committee, proceed to issue to the petitioner engagement order, engaging her as Aganwadi Helper in Paschim Tarangapur Tiniali Anganwadi Center under Jaleswar ICDS Project, within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of Page No.# 5/5 this order. 10. With the above observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant