- (1.) 51 petitioners have filed this writ petition for seeking appointment to the post of Anganwari worker. The counsel has not been able to explain how different causes of 51 persons have been joined altogether in single petition. The counsel should have been conscious enough in this regard. Even otherwise, writ petition for appointment to the post of Anganwari is not maintainable as held in Civil Writ Petition No.5046 of 2010 (Sunita Vs. State of Haryana & others), decided on 12.7.2011. The relevant portion is reproduced as under:- "A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Darshana Devi Versus State of Haryana and others, 2009 153 PunLR 174 has held on the basis of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Versus Ameerbi, 2007 11 SCC 681 that the person working as Anganwari worker does not hold a civil post and the recruitment process is not governed by the Constitution or any Statute. That being the position, the writ petition could not be held maintainable as the authorities are not instrumentalities of State to be amenable to the definition of "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the petitioners, if so advised, may avail the alternative remedy as may be available to the petitioners in accordance with law. The writ petition is, thus, dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to have the alternative remedy."
(2.) In view of the above, the present writ petition is also dismissed in terms of the order passed in Sunita's case (supra).;