MP HC Declines Anganwadi Worker’s Reinstatement For Now, Orders Officials To Reconsider All Candidates’ Applications Within 21 Days

The petitioner was appointed as an Anganwadi Worker at Anganwadi Centre, Village Badera, District Shivpuri, on 24 December 2025.

Her appointment was set aside on 5 August 2026, and the matter was remanded to the competent authorities for fresh consideration of the applications.

Her appeal against that order was dismissed on 28 September 2026.

She then sought relief under Article 226, including reinstatement, contending that the authorities had not properly considered her documents.

The respondents maintained that the dispute concerned candidates’ eligibility, particularly the residential criteria, and required examination by the competent authorities.

Under Article 226, the High Court may decline to examine disputed eligibility documents in the first instance where the competent authority has been directed to reconsider the matter.

The principles of natural justice require that persons likely to be adversely affected receive a reasonable opportunity to present their case, and the authority must consider relevant material and give a reasoned decision.

In Anant Singh and Another v. Govind and Others, 1999 RN 99, this Court held that a writ petition challenging a remand order would not lie where the parties’ rights had not crystallised and they would have an opportunity to present their cases before the remanded authority.

The Court treated the dispute as one concerning candidate eligibility and the assessment of applications and supporting documents, matters that the competent authority had yet to consider on remand.

Consistent with the principle in Anant Singh, it declined to determine the disputed eligibility documents or grant reinstatement at this stage.

It instead directed the authority to reconsider the applications fairly, hear the petitioner and other affected persons, and issue a reasoned decision based on the relevant material.

It directed the competent authority to implement the remand order, reconsider all concerned candidates’ applications, afford affected persons a reasonable personal hearing, consider the relevant material, and pass and communicate a reasoned order within 21 days of receiving a certified copy of the judgment.

There was no order as to costs.