Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) Heard Mrs. Bharti Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, learned Sr. S.C. I. appearing for the Respondent-State, Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel for the Respondent nos. 4 to 6 as well as Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, learned counsel for the Respondent nos. 7 to 10.
(2.) In this writ application, the petitioners have sought for issuance of appropriate writ upon the concerned respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for filling up the posts assigned to the categories of General candidate after quashing the part of Office order dated 19.07.2010 (Annexure-2), issued by the Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Pramandal, Dumka and further prayer has been made to pass appropriate order restraining the respondents to fill up the post earmarked to candidates of General categories against the post of Supervisors in their respective posts and also prayed for issuance of an appropriate letter of selection and appointment accordingly to correct the merit list.
(3.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts, as has been disclosed in the writ application, is that in pursuance to the advertisement published for appointment of 42 Women Supervisors from among the Anganbari Sevika working in 33 old Child Development Schemes in the Division of Dumka in the light of Notification dated 22.05.2006 and letter dated 13.11.2007, 311 Anganbari Sevika and the petitioners having the requisite qualifications, applied for the post of Women Supervisors and the petitioners appeared in the examination. However, to the utter consternation of the petitioners, the result was not in consonance with the advertisement. There was total 42 posts for Women Supervisors (21- Unreserved, 19 Scheduled Tribes, 02 Schedule Caste), but, instead of general category posts, it has been filed up by the other categories of candidates namely respondent No. 4 to 10, who are members of reserved categories. It has been further averred in the writ application that there were two conditions for promotion of Anganbari Sevika to Women Supervisor i.e. (i) Anganbari Sevika, who have rendered 10 years of continuous satisfactory service having qualification of B.A. in any subject and (ii) Anganbari Sevika, who have rendered 15 years of continuous satisfactory service and having qualification of Matriculation, but, the said conditions have not been taken into consideration and one Dipali Mishra at Serial No. 10 in Selection list (posted at Pakur) has not completed 10 years of regular service. All the petitioners were appointed as Anganbari Sevika in between 1990 to 1991 in different Anganbari Kendra in the distt. of Godda and thereafter they got training as Anganbari Sevika. It has further been averred that all the petitioners have possessed requisite qualification i.e. Graduation in their respective subjects and 10 years of continuous service as Anganbari Sevika as necessary for the post of Women Supervisor. It has been further stated that the petitioners have filed several representations before the concerned authorities which did not evoke any response. Left with no alternative, the petitioners have been constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of their grievances.;