A. V. Nirgude, J. - (1.)These petitions challenge the judgment and order dated 29th November, 2011, delivered by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Akola, in Complaint (ULP) No. 203/1996. The petitioner in W.P. No. 2146/2012 was respondent No. 3 in the lower Court. Respondent No. 4 was the complainant. Let me call the parties by their original designation in the lower Court. The complainant stated as under. Integrated Child Development Scheme of the State of Maharashtra is in implementation all over the State since long time. Earlier to 1995, there were Balwadis, where the Balwadi Sevikas were appointed on honorarium basis. On 24th October, 1994, the Government of Maharashtra made changes in the scheme by issuing Resolution dated 24th October, 1994. The State of Maharashtra decided to establish Aanganwadi in place of Balwadi. They also resolved to appoint Aganwadi Sevikas and Madatnis in all the Aanganwadi centers. It was further resolved that Balwadi Sevika who had completed two years service would be appointed as Aanganwadi Sevika.
(2.)In view of this policy decision, the Government of Maharashtra issued an advertisement for filling up 110 posts of Aanganwadi Sevika and Madatnis in all over Maharashtra. The complainant who was already working as Balwadi Sevika for more than 2 years prior to 24th October, 1994, made an application for appointment as Aanganwadi Sevika. The complainant is resident of village Kajaleshwar, Tq. Karanja Lad, Distt. Washim. At this village, there was already a Balwadi established. The complainant, therefore, expected her appointment as Aanganwadi Sevika in view of the policy decision taken by the State of Maharashtra. Along with her application, she annexed her experience certificate etc.
(3.)To the complainant's misfortune, respondent No. 3, who is also resident of the same village, moved her application for appointment as Aanganwadi Sevika. As per the Government Resolution, respondent No. 1-Project Officer and respondent No. 2-Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad, Akola, constituted a committee for selection. After holding interviews, they selected respondent No. 3 to be appointed as Aanganwadi Sevika and selected the complainant as Aanganwadi Madatnis. This was challenged before the Industrial Court by filing Unfair Labour Practice Complaint No. 482/1996 (New No. 203/1996).