D.G.R.PATNAIK, J. - (1.) In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for an order for quashing the order dated 11.11.2003 (Annexure -2), whereby pursuant to the directions of the Respondent No. 5 issued on 06.11.2003, a fresh selection process for appointment to the post of 'Anganbari Sevika' has been issued, although the petitioner has already been selected for the aforesaid post. The further prayer has been made by the petitioner to issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the Respondents not to give effect to the impugned order (Annexure -2) and to allow the petitioner to work as 'Anganbari Sevika'. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that in compliance with the rules and guidelines, issued by the State Government for appointment of the post of 'Anganbari Sevika', a meeting of the 'Amsabha' of the Village Dandarkhurd was held on 18.02.2003. The Selection Committee considered the candidature of the petitioner alongwith other candidates and had selected her, for appointment to the post of 'Anganbari Sevika' at the concerned Anganbari Centre and thereafter forwarded the recommendation to the concerned authorities for issuance of 'the appointment letter. Despite, such recommendation, the concerned authorities did not issue the appointment letter and the matter remained pending for long. Since the formal approval of the Deputy Welfare Commissioner to the recommendations of the Selection Committee, was not issued within 15 days of the recommendations, the petitioner had deemed that the approval was given and accordingly, she continued to render her services as 'Anganbari Sevika' of the concerned Centre. However, after lapse of more than 9 months the impugned order has been passed for initiating a fresh selection process for appointment to the post of 'Anganbari Sevika' inspite of the fact that the petitioner has already been working in the aforesaid post.
(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that without cancelling the selection of the petitioner, the Respondents could not have issued the impugned Notification. Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in a similar matter, when despite their selection made by the Selection Committee, the appointment letters were not issued, the aggrieved persons had filed a writ petition before this Court vide C.W.J.C. No. 3719 of 1998 (R) and by order dated 12.08.1999 in the said writ application, this Court had directed the concerned Respondents to provide the petitioners therein, the appropriate orders of their appointment and to allow them to join at their respective centres.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel submits that the aforesaid order of this Court passed in the earlier writ application was binding in the case of the petitioner also.;