Smt. Kavita W/O Gangadhar vs The President Selection Committee Of ... on 15 December, 2011

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Kavita W/O Gangadhar vs The President Selection Committee Of ... on 15 December, 2011

Bench: N.Ananda

IN THE HIGH COURT OF,KHARN._ ATAKA' H D'  
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBAR;-C;A_ *

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY oE'DECEMBER' 201,1 " 

BEFORE 

THE HONBLE MR.JUSl'l°ICE I~i.ANAND._Al""*-ll  
W.P.No.81748/20'1.L@--RES')--  '

Smt. Kavita W/o Gangadharll

Age about 24 Years, OCc::''H'ou:seh'o.1d,._ . I
R/o Alwai, Tq. §Bha.11j_<I, D=I_st;B.I.dar..   .,

   . «    V Petitioner
[By Sri Rahufl R.b,P.sVt"'1i1':°-'s:_. Ad$7jnxc'at_ej__  

AND:  ....  __ 

1. The l?res1dentx"-._'* _ D  ..
Selection «.Corn:nitt'ee D of  ~. 
Anganwaédiwofkelrls = V D' I
Rep._ by it's 'Il'ie_D.eputy"'Director
VVS/Tg§:)Inen & Child Development Dept.
   _ . . . . 

lg' 2,; V The Planning Officer

.. .Chiid.VVD.eVel'e.p_n'1ent Office
* Ialuka Pgnehayat, Bhalki
Dist: _Bidai--'

I ,3. The» Deputy Commissioner

' .. B_ida'r**

    Asharani

 W"/o Sanjeevkumar
 Aged about 21 Years



__. _ Taltikji 

Occ: Household

R/o Village Tegampur
Tq. Bhalki, Dist: Bidar _ _ ..  --A 
  .Re.spQnden_ts  7

[Sri Manvendra Reddy, Govt. Advocate fo=:'R..-r1 to R3' V'

Notice to R.4 served) 3  ' .. '~ .

This Writ Petition is ﬁled under Aiticles  0227 V
of the Constitution of India, praying to '-issue a'; writ of
Certiorari quashing the .selection."ord'e_r of temporary list
passed by the Responde_n't«.No.f1 c_m"ord.er*«dated 29-09-2010
vide Annexure~'E' and etc; 'A  l  } it A. 

This petition coming..on Vfor=_Pre1_irnir1T'aJy Hearing 'B'
Group this day, tLl1e"_Cou§rt made thevfollowijng:

The   question the appointment
of  Alogacnwadviwxvivorker of Alwai village,
Bhalki  0  on the ground that
IV--res.p.onden't  resident of Tegampur village, Bhalki

  heard Sri. Rahul R. Asture, learned counsel

for and learned Government Advocate for State.

3% As could be seen from records, the IV--respondent

has secured 68.16% of marks in SSLC examination and she has studied Kannada as first language. Whereas, Pe% &AQ I/U . ' K ' has secured 53.44% of marks in SSLC"e~xaminatilori.-it '4Itlisl.l_n.ot' it disputed that SSLC examination is the qualificatid'n..fori_:

appointment of Anganwadi wo;<'l(e--r.

4. The learned counsel for lV~ it respondent is a resident 9f TeganipVurlVillage,ll Bnalki Taluka and therefore, she -as Anganwadi worker of A1wai4.yillage.;:"lll has produced document Hrxlwai Village. Even otherwise,..._ be denied the appointrnerit of residence or region. The learned not brought to my notice anyplaw made State to impose reasonable restriction Viorlthe plirotecﬁon available to petitioner under Article 16.

l = . _5;v.._'I'h»e'rVdocuments produced by petitioner would show thatl"1V--res.lpfonTdent is resident of Tegampur village and the _ document produced by the IV-respondent would show that lshemis anative of Alwai village. In the circumstances, it can said that appointing authority has com[mEtt appointment of IV--respondent. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

The learned Government Advocate is 1 "

his memo of appearance within two weeks from Vi LG

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court