Sonika vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Pankaj Purohit, J

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the indulgence of this Court for a direction to the respondent no.2/Appellate Committee to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging the appointment of respondent no.4 on the post of Aganbadi Karyakarti/Worker within stipulated period.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the Government Order dated 20.03.2024, respondent no.4 as well as petitioner submitted her application for engagement as Aganbadi Karyakarti in the center named as Ward No.22 of Roorkee, District Haridwar. After the conclusion of the selection process, respondent no.4 was selected and was engaged as Aganbadi Karyakarti.

The petitioner, who is presently working as Aganbadi Sahiyka, in the same centre, also participated in the selection process, but owing to her non-selection, she moved an appeal to the Appellate Committee i.e. respondent no.2 on 27.05.2024 challenging the appointment/engagement of the respondent no.4 mainly on the ground that the respondent no.4 is a resident of different area. The said appeal is pending consideration before the respondent no.2.

An innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is that a direction be issued to the respondent no.2 to decide the appeal moved by the petitioner dated 27.05.2024 expeditiously and if such a direction is issued, the ends of justice would be met.

To this proposition, there is no opposition from the side of learned State Counsel.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.2 i.e. the Appellate Committee to decide the appeal of the petitioner dated 27.05.2024, annexure-4 to the writ petition, expeditiously, but not later than two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.