The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C). No. 25244 of 2025 (An Application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India) Rinki Kathar ...… Petitioner -Versus- State of Odisha & Ors .... _______________________________________________________ Opposite Parties For Petitioner : Mr. D.K.Mohapatra, Advocate, For Opp. Party : Mr. S.N.Pattnaik, AGA _______________________________________________________ CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA JUDGMENT 22nd September, 2025 SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J. This matter was listed for admission yet on consent of parties, same is taken up for final disposal. 2. This is the fourth journey of the petitioner to this
Facts
Court for redressal of her grievance .The facts of the case are that as per the advertisement issued on 07.02.2009 by the CDPO, Dhankauda for engagement of Anganwadi Page 1 of 10 workers, the petitioner submitted her application in respect of Ambaghura Anganwadi Centre under Pandiapali revenue village. She was duly selected in the selection process and was engaged as Anganwadi worker vide order dated 11.06.2009 of the CDPO. While continuing as such, the Collector, Sambalpur, vide order dated 03.08.2009 directed her disengagement on the allegation of some outsiders to the effect that she does not belong to the service area of the Anganwadi Centre. Said order was followed by order dated 10.08.2009 of the CDPO formally disengaging her. The petitioner challenged
Legal Reasoning
the order of the Collector before this Court in W.P(C) No. 12166 of 2009. This Court by order dated 20.08.2009, quashed the impugned order and directed the Collector to rehear the matter after granting opportunity of hearing. The petitioner appeared before the Collector and put forth her submission but the Collector; by order dated 24.03.2010 reiterated his earlier order. The petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C). No. 7749 of 2010 wherein, vide order dated 13.03.2023 the order of the Page 2 of 10 Collector was quashed and the matter was remanded to the Sub-Collector for hearing. The Sub-Collector heard the matter and rejected the petitioner’s appeal vide order dated 03.07.2023. The petitioner again approached this Court in W.P.(C). No.18126 of 2024. This Court, by order dated 10.01.2025 quashed the order of the Sub-Collector and remitted the matter for consideration afresh. As such, the matter was heard again by the Sub-Collector but by order dated 08.08.2025, the claim of the petitioner was rejected. Being aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Therefore, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to- (i) to Admit the writ application; (ii) Call for record; (iii) Issue Rule nisi calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause as to why the order of disengagement order dated 10.08.2009 of the C.D.P.O under Annexure-5 in respect of petitioner only and order dated 08.08.2025 passed by the Sub-Collector under Annexure-13 shall not be quashed. (iv) And if the Opp. Parties do not show cause or show insufficient cause issue a writ in the nature of certiorari in quashing the impugned order dated 10.08.2009 of the C.D.P.O. under Annexure- 5 in respect of petitioner only and order dated 08.08.2025 passed by the Sub-Collector under Annexure-13. (v) And issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioner to continue as Page 3 of 10 Anganwadi Workers in Ambaghura Anganwadi Centre under C.D.P.O. Dhankauda in the District of Sambalpur in terms of appointment order dated 11.06.2009 by regularizing the service of the petitioner for all consequential benefit purpose. And this Hon’ble Court may pass any other order/orders as would be deemed just and proper by this Hon’ble Court; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray”. 3. Heard Mr. D.K.Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.N.Pattnaik, learned AGA for the State. 4. Mr. Mohapatra would argue that the guidelines dated 02.05.2007 permit a resident of the same village to apply for selection as Anganwadi Worker. In the instant case, no person from the service area had applied for engagement. Therefore, the petitioner was fully eligible as per the guidelines. The Government has issued necessary clarification in this regard, which the Sub-Collector took note of in the impugned order but went on to reject the claim of the petitioner. According to the Mr. Mohapatra, the impugned order being contrary to the guidelines cannot be sustained. Page 4 of 10 5. Mr. Pattnaik, learned State counsel though supported the impugned order yet on query posed by this Court fairly submitted that as per the guidelines and clarification issued by the Government subsequently, a person from the same village is also eligible to apply though preference is to be given to a person residing within the service area of the Anganwadi Centre. He further fairly submits that the petitioner belongs to the revenue village in which the Anganwadi Centre is situated. 6. From the contentions raised, it is evident that the sole question that falls for consideration is whether the petitioner was eligible for engagement as Anganwadi worker of the centre in question or not. There is no dispute that the petitioner was selected in a due selection process and was engaged. There is also no dispute that the petitioner belongs to Pandiapali revenue village and that Ambaghura Anganwadi Centre comes under the said village. In fact, the Sub-Collector, in the impugned order has specifically stated that Ambaghura is a hamlet of Page 5 of 10 Pandiapali revenue village. Such being the factual position, it would be appropriate to refer to the Government guidelines dated 02.05.2007 of which Clause 1, being relevant is quoted hereinbelow: Applications for selection of Volunteers to work as Anganwadi Workers will be each village/Anganwadi Center area from women residing in the said village/Anganwadi Centre area.” invited for Thus, prima facie, a resident of the village is eligible to apply for engagement as Anganwadi worker. Apparently, in view of some confusion arising in this regard, the Government of Odisha issued a clarification on 01.03.2008 which is reproduced below: Government of Orissa Woman & Child Development Department No. IV IC.S.r.154/07: 7161/WCD., dt.1.3.08 From: Addl. Secretary to Government Shri N.Behera, To The C.D.P.O., Gania, Nayagarh. Sub:- Clarification on selection/engagement of AWW Ref:- Your memo No. 462 dt. 12.12.07 Sir/Madam, With reference to the above noted subject, I am directed to State as hereunder. i) According to paragraph-1 of the Revised Guidelines, the AWW should be resident of the AWC area. If no suitable candidate is available in the AWC area, then candidates of the village could be considered. Page 6 of 10 ii) Residential certificate issued by the Tahasildar should be entertained. Yours faithfully, Sd/-1.3.08 Addl. Secretary to Government. OFFICE OF THE DIST. MAGISTRATE AND Collector: Sambalpur Memo No. 901/SW Dt.30.06.09 Copy forwarded to all CDPOs of Sambalpur District for their information and necessary action. Sd/-2.7.09 Dist. Social Welfare Officer, Sambalpur. Thus, it is clear that if no suitable candidate is available in the Anganwadi Centre service area then candidate of the village can be considered. There is nothing in the impugned order to suggest that there was any applicant from within the service area of the Anganwadi Centre. Therefore, the petitioner was eligible for engagement. The Collector, acting upon objections raised by some outsiders directed disengagement of the petitioner but in view of the guidelines dated 02.05.2007 followed by the clarification dated 01.03.2008, there is no way by which the petitioner can be said to be not eligible. Interestingly, the Sub-Collector has referred to the guidelines dated 02.05.2007 as well as the clarification dated 01.03.2008 but referring to some judgments of this Court held that Page 7 of 10 the applicant must belong to the service area of the centre. 7. There can be no quarrel with regard to the ratio decided in the said cases, which is to be effect that ordinarily, a resident from within the service area of the centre in question should be selected so as to better perform the duties assigned to an Anganwadi worker but even in one of the cases relied upon by the Sub-Collector namely, Sasmita Sahoo vrs. State of Odisha and Ors. (WP (C) No.2342 of 2009), this Court referring to the clarification issued by the Government held that in case no suitable candidate is available from the said area, then applicants from the village in which the Anganwadi Centre area situates may be accepted even though the applicant is not a resident of the service area. The Sub- Collector has evidently mis-interpreted the ratio decided in the cases cited by him to hold that the petitioner was not eligible, being a resident of the revenue village and not specifically of the service area of the centre in question. Page 8 of 10 8. From what has been narrated before, the above finding of the Sub-Collector runs contrary to the guidelines as well as the clarification issued by the Government, more so as there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was preferred over an applicant from the service area of the centre in question during selection. The impugned order is therefore, rendered unsustainable in the eye of law. 9. For the foregoing reasons therefore, the writ application is allowed. The impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by the Sub-Collector and order of disengagement dated 10.08.2009 of the CDPO are hereby set aside. The concerned authorities are directed to re- engage the petitioner as Anganwadi worker in Ambaghura Anganwadi Centre in terms of the order of engagement dated 11.06.2009 within four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order by the petitioner. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any financial benefits for the period during Page 9 of 10 which she was disengaged but the said period shall be counted towards other service benefits. Deepak ……..………………….. Sashikanta Mishra, Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEEPAK PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,Cuttack Date: 24-Sep-2025 19:02:12 Page 10 of 10