AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J
I.A. No. 7199 of 2021
Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey submits that I.A. No. 7199 of 2021 has been filed on account of subsequent development seeking quashing of the letter No. 481 dated 07.05.2012 whereby respondent No. 5 has appointed one Sangeeta Devi as Anganbadi Sevika. Further prayer has been made seeking addition of Sangeeta Devi as respondent No. 10 in the present write petition.
During the course of argument, it transpired that the present writ petition was relating to the Aam Sabha which was held in the year 2009 and it has also been mentioned in para-17 of the writ petition that in the year 2010, the respondents again notified for appointment for the post of Anganbari Sevika and as per notification, Aam Sabha was held on 08.02.2010 and the private respondent No. 9 was again selected. However, from perusal of the counter affidavit it appears that a fresh Aam Sabha was held on 21.12.2011 for the post of Anganbari Sevika and the proposed respondent Sangeeta Devi was selected in Aam Sabha held on 21.12.2011. Earlier, the person holding the post of Anganbari Sevika was Saroj Devi who is respondent No. 9.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that interlocutory application is sought for challenging the selection of Anganbari Sevika in connection with Aam Sabha held on 21.12.2011, this court is not inclined to allow the interlocutory application as the same would change the nature of the writ petition. Considering the fact that the writ petition does not relate to Aam Sabha held on 21.12.2011, accordingly, I.A. No. 7199 of 2021 is hereby rejected. However, liberty is reserved with the petitioner to take appropriate steps in connection with Aam Sabha held in the year 2011 and the corresponding selection process in accordance with law.
W.P. (S) No. 5634 of 2011
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, post this case on 23.02.2022.