ANITA SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PREGNABILITY of the order dated 23-11-2007 passed by the learned Single judge in W. P. No. 16024/2007 (S) is called in question by the appellant invoking the jurisdiction under Section 2 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005.

(2.) THE facts which are imperative to be uncurtained are that the fourth respondent herein invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the soundness of the order dated 7-11 -2007 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Sagar giving the stamp of approval to the order dated 29-8-2007 passed by the Collector, Panna who had set aside the selection of the writ petitioner for the post of 'aganbadi' worker. The present appellant had filed a complaint before the Sub Divisional officer, Panna regarding the appointment of respondent No. 4 stating, inter alia, that the appointment was against the norms and the rules. It was putforth that the present appellant was more suitable and qualified in comparison to selected candidate. Various averments were made before the Sub Divisional Officer. Eventually the matter was taken up by the Collector who set aside the appointment of respondent No. 4. Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid order the respondent No. 4 preferred a revision which was dealt with by the Additional commissioner who did not think it proper to unsettle the order passed by the collector. When the defensibility of the order was called in question before the writ Court, the learned Single Judge quashed the order passed by the commissioner solely on the ground that the said order did not contain reasons and was not a speaking order and accordingly directed the Revisional Authority to decide the revision on merits.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. Sanjay Patel, learned Counsel for the appellant, mr. Alok Pathak, learned Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Ms. Anita Vishwakarma, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4.