District Magistrate must reconsider the Anganwadi selection after examining the disputed certificate and parties’ documents.

The petitioner challenged the District Magistrate, Gaya’s order dated 31 August 2021, which set aside the District Programme Officer’s order concerning the petitioner’s selection as an Anganwari Sevika at Baggahi Centre.

The dispute involved the genuineness of an educational certificate issued by a Chhattisgarh Board.

The petitioner sought quashing of the District Magistrate’s order, acceptance of her joining, and consequential benefits.

The petitioner and private respondent No. 7 jointly submitted that a similar matter had been remanded to the District Magistrate in CWJC No. 1814 of 2022.

1. Whether the District Magistrate’s order concerning the petitioner’s selection and the disputed certificate should be set aside or reconsidered

2. Whether the matter should be remanded to the District Magistrate to consider the documents relating to the disputed certificate, while maintaining the private respondent’s existing protection pending that decision

The Court did not determine the merits of the certificate dispute or apply a specific statutory provision.

It followed the directions in CWJC No. 1814 of 2022, which required the District Magistrate to reconsider the matter on the documents produced by the petitioner or private respondent concerning the disputed Board-issued certificate.

preserve the protection granted to the private respondent until the decision

issue a reasoned and speaking order within 90 days of the private respondent’s appearance, after the petitioner files for rehearing within 30 days

Because both the petitioner and private respondent relied on the approach adopted in the similarly situated CWJC No. 1814 of 2022, the Court disposed of the petition in accordance with that decision rather than adjudicating the certificate’s genuineness or the merits of the District Magistrate’s order.

The District Magistrate was directed to assess the documents afresh, with the private respondent’s protection continuing until a final decision.

The petitioner must file a petition for hearing on remand, along with the High Court’s order, within 30 days; the District Magistrate must pass a reasoned and speaking order within 90 days after receiving it, with that period counted from the private respondent’s appearance.

The private respondent’s protection is to remain undisturbed until the District Magistrate’s final decision.