(1.) The petitioner and also respondent No. 4 were both candidates for appointment as Anganwari Worker in village Behram. The petitioner is unmarried daughter of the village; while respondent No. 4 is daughter-in-law of the village. On the recommendation of the Gram Panchayat of village Behram, respondent No. 4 was appointed. The petitioner's grievance is that she being more meritorious and more experienced deserves the appointment aforementioned and the appointment of respondent No. 4 deserves to be invalidated when examined on the touchstone of the instructions regarding appointment of Anganwadi Workers and Helpers.
(2.) As against it, the stand taken up by the respondents (respondent No. 4 included, though she preferred to file an independent written statement as against joint written statement filed by official respondent Nos. 1 to 3) is that respondent No. 4 was preferred for appointment in view of the fact that she was daughter-in-law of the village and she was as meritorious as the petitioner. There is a commonness of stance taken up by the official respondents and the non-official respondents.
(3.) For easy appreciation of controversy, the relevant instructions (pertaining to material status and experience) are extracted as under :