AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the order of the ADM whereby the appeal of Respondent No.3 was allowed and the present Appellant had to make way for Respondent No.3 as Anganwadi Worker (AWW) of the Majhimunda Anganwadi Centre (AWC). Admittedly, Respondent No.3 scored more marks than the Appellant, but had been rejected on the ground that she was resident of village Chaurasipur which was thought not to be part of the Majhimunda AWC.
As it transpires the said village was in fact part of the AWC area and therefore, the appeal filed by Respondent No.3 was allowed.
The learned Single Judge has noted that the Appellant was not able to produce any material to show that Chaurasipur village is not part of the Majhimunda AWC area. Even before this Court, the Appellant is not able to produce any material as such. What the Appellant has filed is an additional affidavit enclosing a proposal prepared for opening of new AWCs where according to him at Sl No.107, the Majhimunda AWC has been mentioned and in the last column village Chaurasipur has not been mentioned as being part of the area. The said list obviously is not conclusive of the villages that form part of the AWC of Majhimunda as this is simply an internal document setting out proposals for opening of AWCs.
In the absence of the any material to show that Chaurasipur village is not part of the Majhimunda AWC area, the Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the learned Single Judge. There is no merit in the present appeal and it is dismissed as such.
.............................................