ASHA ARORA, J. - (1.) THE writ petitioner/respondent had applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker pursuant to an advertisement dated 5th July, 2006 which was published as per Memorandum dated 25th January, 2006. The aforesaid advertisement stipulated as follows: "The candidate for the post of Anganwadi Worker should have a Madhyamik or equivalent pass certificate. SC, ST candidate can apply only if they have passed class VIII. Graduate and above cannot apply for the post. If the results of the graduation examination are not declared on the date of the publication of the notice, then the applicant can apply." The writ petitioner was duly selected and appointed as an Anganwadi Worker whereafter it was detected that she had completed her graduation before applying for the post and in suppression of the said fact, she had given a false declaration regarding her educational qualification. Her appointment was accordingly terminated by a letter dated 2/12/2009 the relevant portion of which reads thus: "As reported by the concerned authority, she completed graduation before applying for the post of Anganwadi Worker and so, as per terms and conditions of the appointment, her service is hereby terminated from the post of Anganwadi Worker."
(2.) THE aforesaid order of termination was challenged by the writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 19895 (W) of 2012.
(3.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsels for the parties the learned Single Judge of this Court observed as follows: "I find that the issue of suppression of over qualification for consideration of candidature for engagement to the post of Anganwadi Worker has already been decided by a Special Bench of this Court in the case of Rina Dutta and others versus Anjali Mahato and others, 2010 2 CalLJ 321 and the relevant portions of the above decision are quoted below: "21. When a particular qualification is laid down in an advertisement relating to a distinct class of candidates, the candidates possessing a qualification higher than that advertised can ordinarily not be debarred or disqualified, but it is open to the employer to make a rule providing for disqualification of candidates possessing qualification higher than the prescribed qualification, but the burden would be on the employer to justify such a rule." By the order dated 12/9/2012 the learned Single Judge held that "in view of the above settled principles of law the impugned order of termination cannot be sustained in law and the same is quashed and set aside.";