D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) Prayer in this writ application has been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing/canceling the appointment of the respondent No. 5 on the post of Sevika for the Anganbari Centre at Kankjole -Bartalla in Barharwa block within the district of Sahebganj and for a direction to the official respondents for fresh selection of Scvikas for the Anganbari Sevika according to the guidelines and instructions issued by the Government of Jharkhand.
(2.) THE petitioner's case in brief is that she is a resident of Village -Kankjole in Bartalla where the Anganbari Centre has been established. A separate and distinct centre named as Kankjole -Bartalla was subsequently created for the area where the petitioner resides. On 10.06.2007 a meeting of the Aam Sabha conducted by the constituents the Block Development Officer, Junior Engineer, Barharwa and two field supervisors of the Anganbari programme, was held for the selection of candidates for the post of Sevika at the aforesaid Anganbari Centre. The petitioner's candidature along with 4 -5 other candidates were considered and the petitioner was selected for the post by the Aam Sabha and her name was also recommended by the Aam Sabha for her appointment. However, subsequently on 18.06.2007, the selection process although completed on 10.06.2007, was cancelled purportedly by the orders of the concerned authorities and declaration was given for conducting a fresh selection process on 18.06.2007. Against such declaration, the beneficiaries of the village had protested before the Deputy Commissioner. Pursuant to the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner, a fresh selection process was initiated on 28.06.2007. When the selection team comprising of Junior Engineer, Panchayat Sewak and other responsible officers assembled at the Anganbari Centre, the respondent No. 5 and some other candidates had submitted their respective applications but while the petitioner wanted to file her application, she was deprived of the privilege. Her application form was snatched away at the behest of the respondent No. 5. Although on account of the permission granted, the meeting of the Aam SAbha could not be held on 18.06.2007 but the petitioner was surprised that it was subsequently declared that the meeting was actually held and the respondent No. 5 was selected to the post of Sevika in the Anganbari Centra. Against this, the beneficiaries of the village as well as he Block Development Officer had reported to the Deputy Commissioner. Sahebganj stating that the meeting could not be held and the declaration of the selection of the respondent No. 5 was not made in accordance with the IUICS of procedures. Yet, the Deputy Commissioner did not take any steps to cancel the selection of the respondent No. 5 nor has he passed any order on the petitioner's request for conducting a fresh meeting for selection of the Anganbari Sevikas.
(3.) J .C. to Sr. S.C. -II is present though no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent State.;