- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
(2.) THIS petition is directed against an order dated 7.11.2005 by which the claim of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Mukhya Sevika has been rejected. The petitioner was working as an Anganvadi Worker in Jasra Block in Allahabad in a Central Government's 'Integrated Child Development Scheme' on a fixed honorarium. The Governor in furtherance of the Child Development and Nutrition project launched by the Central Government, framed "The U.P. Child Development and Nutrition (Subordinate) Service Rules 1992" under Article 309 of the Constitution of India ( hereinafter referred to as the 1992 Rules) creating several posts, including the post of "Mukhya Sevika" in the scale of Rs.1350-2200 and provided for direct recruitment to the post. The Central Government, considering the plight of such workers, decided to reserve 25% posts of Mukhya Sevika to be filled up by recruiting such Anganwadi Workers and accordingly notified the decision to the State Government vide its letter dated 28.4.1995 for amending the service rules. In pursuance thereof, the State Government amended the 1992 Rules vide Notification dated 25.12.1996 (hereinafter referred to as 1996 Amendment) providing that 25% of the posts of 'Mukhya Sevika' would be filled up through interview by those Anganwadi Workers who had completed 10 years of engagement and were less than 45 years in age as on the 1st day of the recruitment year. But before any selection or interview could be held, the rules were further amended vide notification dated 19.6.1998 ( hereinafter referred to as 1998 Amendment) by increasing the reservation from 25% to 50% and the criteria of recruitment was changed from interview to merit.
(3.) IT appears thereafter certain Anganwadi Workers were appointed to the post of Mukhya Sevika in 2005 but the petitioner was left out and no action was forthcoming despite approaching the authorities through representation, therefore, she preferred Writ Petition 61333 of 2005 which was disposed off by an order dated 16.9.2005 directing the respondents to consider her claim by a reasoned order.;