Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. Ms. A. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for all the respondents submits that the petitioner had earlier filed WP(C) No.3409/2015, praying that she should be allowed to participate in the selection process for direct recruitment to the same vacant post of Anganwadi Worker, in terms of an Advertisement dated 12.05.2014. The petitioner submitted her application form, for being considered Page No.# 3/5 for the vacant post of Anganwadi Worker. However, the same was rejected the State respondents, on the ground that the Bachelor Preparatory Programme (BPP) Certificate submitted by the petitioner was not equivalent to a HSLC Certificate, which was the eligibility criteria required for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court vide WP(C) No.3409/2015. She submits that this Court, vide order dated 03.11.2017, dismissed the petitioner's writ petition, on the ground that the petitioner's BPP Certificate was not equivalent to a HSLC Certificate.

6. I have learned the learned counsels for the parties.

7. As rightly pointed out by Ms. A. Talukdar, the writ petitioner had filed WP(C) 3409/2015, with a prayer to direct the respondents, to accept the petitioner's application for direct recruitment to the post of Anganwadi Worker in pursuant to the Advertisement dated 12.05.2015. The State respondents having rejected the petitioner's application on the ground that the BPP Certificate was not equivalent to a HSLC Certificate, the petitioner filed WP(C) No.3409/2015, with a prayer that she should be allowed to participate in the selection process. However, this Court, vide order dated 03.11.2017, dismissed WP(C) No.3409/2015.