Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner being a resident of village Yogitola Panchayat, Jhiktia where the Anganbari Centre situates, has sought for direction upon the respondents to cancel the appointment of respondent no.6 as Anganbari Sevika and for direction upon the respondents to initiate fresh appointment process from among eligible persons to the post of Anganbari Sevika.
(2.) The facts, as has been averred in the writ application, in brief, are that the respondent no.6 on the basis of forged documents procured appointment on the post of Anganbari Sevika. Being aggrieved by the selection of respondent no.6, the petitioner along with villagers preferred representation before the respondents, which fell on deaf ears. Being aggrieved by the inaction/indifference of respondent authorities, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the appointment of respondent no.6 is liable to be cancelled on the ground of non-fulfilment of the eligibility criteria. Learned counsel further submits that conduct of the respondent authorities in not looking into the grievance of the villagers, amounts to action sans probity in administration and de hors of the guidelines meant for appointment of Anganbari Sevika.;