Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Usha Devi vs State Of J&K And Others on 1 August, 2023
Author: Rahul Bharti
Bench: Rahul Bharti
24
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
SWP No. 140/2010
Usha Devi ..... Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. H. C. Jalmeria, Advocate
Vs
State of J&K and others ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Ramesh Arora, Sr. AAG for R- 1 & 2.
None for the private respondent no. 3.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
ORDER
01.08.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
01. For the purpose of engagement of an Anganwadi Helper with respect to Integrated Child Development Service (ICDS), Billawar, an advertisement dated 19.02.2009 came to be issued by the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Billawar enlisting 31 Anganwadi Centres, for which the engagement of Anganwadi Helper was intended. At serial no. 1 of the said advertisement was the Anganwadi Centre Junan (Juran) in Panchayat Garh Malti, Ward no. 5. The period for submission of application forms was spelled out in the advertisement to be ten days within which prospective candidates were to submit their application forms.
2 SWP No. 140/2010
02. The petitioner along with one other contender namely Pushpa Devi had come to submit their application forms within the time given.
03. The petitioner came to be taken by surprise upon coming into picture of a selection list issued by the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Billawar in a Newspaper of January 2, 2010 in which the name of the respondent no. 3 - Reva Rani came to figure as Anganwadi Helper for said centre. The result of the selection exercise took the petitioner by surprise leading her to make enquiry with respect to the participation of the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani in the selection process as the petitioner was of the confirmed impression that the application form of the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani had not been submitted at all within ten days of time limitation as prescribed in the advertisement notice.
04. The petitioner came to find by virtue of RTI information disclosure that the application form of the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani was bearing tampering in the context of date of its submission. This fact is born out from the two application forms with respect to the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani. In one application the date of submission of application form recorded is 15.02.2009 which in no manner could have been the date of 3 SWP No. 140/2010 submission of the application form as the date of advertisement itself is of 19.02.2009 whereas in the other application form the same date has been tampered and over-written to mention that the date of submission of application is 05.03.2009. The tampering is visible to the naked eye.
05. The officials respondent nos. 1 & 2 from their end have also not come with true disclosure of facts and as such this Court is constrained to believe the record as procured by the petitioner through the mode of RTI from the office of the respondent no. 2 i.e. Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Billawar.
06. This Court has no iota of doubt that the entry of the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani as an applicant for the selection process was blatantly compromised one and was the case of a backdoor entry which resulted in denial of consideration of engagement of the petitioner as well as to the other applicant namely Pushpa Devi.
07. This Court in terms of an order dated 03.02.2010 had come to stay the selection of the private respondent no. 3-Reva Rani as Anganwadi Helper and as such till date the engagement of Anganwadi Helper in the Anganwadi Centre Junan (Juran) in 4 SWP No. 140/2010 Panchayat Garh Malti, Ward no. 5 has not taken place. Given the fact that ex-facie the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani had not submitted her application form for the selection and engagement as Anganwadi Helper within ten days' time given, as such, the respondent no. 2-Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Billawar was not to consider the candidature of the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani as an applicant/contender along with the petitioner and the other applicant namely Pushpa Devi. Thus, to this extent, the consideration of the respondent no. 3-Reva Rani for selection as Anganwadi Helper in Anganwadi Centre Junan (Juran) in Panchayat Garh Malti, Ward no. 5 is patently illegal and arbitrary which deserves to be set aside and is, accordingly, set aside.
08. The respondent no. 2-Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Billawar is directed to consider the case of the petitioner and the other candidate namely Pushpa Devi for engagement as Anganwadi Helper in Anganwadi Centre Junan (Juran) in Panchayat Garh Malti, Ward no. 5 on the basis of their comparative merit and to select the one who is better merit holder.
09. Needful exercise be done by the respondent no. 2-Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), Billawar within a period of 5 SWP No. 140/2010 one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, which is to be delivered by the petitioner to the respondent no. 2 against proper receipt.
Disposed of accordingly.
(Rahul Bharti) Judge Jammu 01.08.2023 Muneesh Whether the order is speaking : Yes Whether the order is reportable: No