Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 924 (JHR)

Sumati Devi v. State of Jharkhand

2009-07-03

SUSHIL HARKAULI

body2009
JUDGMENT: This appeal, which is time barred by 168 days, has been preferred against an order dated 15.10.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P (S) No.2112/2008. However, the appeal has been filed along with an application for condonation of delay, in which it has been stated that the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed period of limitation since the appellant had preferred a review petition against the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, against which this appeal has been filed. Although we are not convinced with the explanation offered with regard to the delay in filing this appeal, we thought it just and appropriate to permit the counsel for the appellant to address us on the merit of the appeal merely to avoid any miscarriage of justice, if there be any. We, therefore, permitted the counsel for the appellant to argue this appeal on merit. On hearing the counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, it could be noticed that the petitioner-appellant had filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge for a direction to the respondent no.2, Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, for holding an enquiry and for consideration of the objection of the petitioner in her representation where she had challenged the appointment of the respondent no.5 on the post of Anganwari Sewika. She had essentially contended that the respondent no.5, who was selected for the post of Anganwari Sewika, was only possessing the certificate of class X pass, which is the basic qualification for the post and the appellant is possessing a higher qualification as she was holding Intermediate degree, which is one degree above the qualification of the selected candidate. Learned counsel for the appellant emphasized that in view of the circular of the respondent-State indicating that a person having higher qualification should be selected for the post of Anganwari Sewika, the appellant had a superior claim over the selected candidate, i.e. respondent no.5. However, when we tested this argument in the light of the rule for selection to the post of Anganwari Sewika, it disclosed that an Anganwari Sewika is to be selected by the majority of votes of the members of the Aam Sabha, where the beneficiaries, i.e. the villagers of the locality, were entitled to participate. However, when we tested this argument in the light of the rule for selection to the post of Anganwari Sewika, it disclosed that an Anganwari Sewika is to be selected by the majority of votes of the members of the Aam Sabha, where the beneficiaries, i.e. the villagers of the locality, were entitled to participate. There is also a rider that only those candidates who are referred by the Selection Committee to the Aam Sabha will be allowed to be considered by the Aam Sabha and therein, the essential qualification for the candidate is the certificate of class X pass. It is not the case of the appellant that the selected candidate is not possessing class X pass certificate but it is her case that she was better qualified since she had an Intermediate Certificate to her credit. But in the process it is missed that the essential qualification was only the condition of eligibility for reference of a candidate to the Aam Sabha for selection and when the names of the appellant having Intermediate degree and of the respondent no.5 possessing the certificate of class X pass were referred to the Aam Sabha, then as per the rule, it is the majority of votes of the members of the Aam Sabha, which was the final authority, to decide upon the selection. In the instant matter, the Aam Sabha, by majority of votes of the members, selected respondent no.5 and that selection is clearly in consonance with the rules indicating that it is the Aam Sabha which is vested with the power of selection although reference of names of the candidates is to be made by the Committee. Respondent no.5 having been selected by the majority votes of the members of the Aam Sabha, which is vested with the power of selection, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the learned Single Judge. Hence the appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself.