# Babita @ Babita Chandra v. State Of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2025) 7 ILRA 406
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-07-15
- **Case number:** Writ A No. 7430 of 2025
- **Bench:** Ajit Kumar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/babita-babita-chandra-v-state-of-u-p-ors-53559
- **Pages:** 10

## Headnote

C.S.C.
ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Whether petitioner, having applied for direct
recruitment to the post of Mukhya Sevika
issued
by the U.P. Subordinate Services
Selection Commission, could challenge the
selection process by invoking Rule 4(2) of the
U.P.
Child
Development
and
Nutrition
(Subordinate) Service Rules, 1992, meant for
promotion from amongst Anganbari Workers
possessing High School qualification and ten
years' service.
HEADNOTE
7 All. Babita @ Babita Chandra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
407
U.P. Child Development and Nutrition
(Subordinate) Service Rules, 1992 - Rr.
4(2), 17 & 18 - Recruitment on the post of
Mukhya Sewika - Direct recruitment and
promotion - Distinction - Challenge to
direct recruitment by candidate who
applied thereunder - Estoppel against
challenge.
Held : In the present case, vacancies falling in
the fifty per cent direct recruitment quota were
advertised for direct recruitment to the post of
Mukhya Sevika. it being a case of direct
recruitment through examination by Commission
as contemplated under Rule 17 of the Rules, it
cannot be be confused with recruitment
through Departmental Selection Committee as
contemplated under Rule 18. Rule 17 lays down
the procedure for direct recruitment through the
Commission on the basis of Competitive
examination and interview, whereas Rule 18
provides for the procedure for recruitment by
promotion through the Selection Committee.
Petitioner having applied against vacancy so
advertised could not have questioned the
qualification prescribed under the advertisement
for
she
herself
had
submitted
to
the
advertisement by moving application as per
qualification
mentioned
therein.
Petitioner
cannot be permitted to take plea that selection
process is de hors the procedure as 10 years'
experience on the post of Anganbari Worker
which is prescribed under Rule 4(2) has not
been
taken
into
consideration.
Petition
dismissed. [Paras 12-15] (E-5)
CASE LAW CITED

List of Acts
The U.P. Child Development and Nutrition
(Subordinate) Service Rules, 1992; Constitution
of India, Article 226
List of Keywords
Recruitment - Direct recruitment - Promotion
- Anganbari Worker - Mukhya Sevika -
Qualification - Advertisement - Rule 4(2) -
Rule 17 - Departmental Selection Committee -
Commission - Estoppel - De hors procedure -
Challenge to qualification.
CASE ARISING FROM
Writ
petition
under
Article
226
of
the
Constitution seeking to set aside the entire
selection process undertaken by the U.P.
Subordinate
Services
Selection
Commission
pursuant
to
Advertisement
No.
5Examination/2022 dated 4 July 2022 for
recruitment to the post of Mukhya Sevika.
Appearances for Parties
Advs. For Petitioner: Sri Braj Mohan Singh
Advs. For Respondents: Sri M.C. Chaturvedi,
learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by
Sri Gaurav Singh, Standing Counsel

## Text

406 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
be denied to the petitioner is the status of a
teacher and consideration of his case as
such under the CAS, which is a direct
consequence of Section 3(5) of the Act of
2016 read with bylaw 2(b) vii) of the bylaws.

48. More than anything else, since the
petitioner has all along been treated as a
member of the non-teaching and non-academic
staff, it would be necessary for the State
Government to re-classify the petitionerâ€TMs
post as a teaching post in order to extend to him
the benefit of the CAS. We make it clear that
we have not at all pronounced about the rights
of employees, who were appointed after
incorporation of the Institute into the University
under the Act of 2016. Not speaking about the
rights of employees, who were appointed after
incorporation of the Institute into the University
under the Act of 2016, the petitioner, who has
since long been included under the amended
bylaws of 1990 in the academic staff and
grouped along with other teachers of the
Institute vide bylaw 2. (b) vii) of the bylaws,
must be regarded as a teacher in view of all that
we have said about his rights, upon transition of
harness from the Institute to the University.

49. In the result, Writ-A No.6849 of 2022
succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order
dated
19.04.2022
passed
by
the
Vice
Chancellor of the University, to the extent it
declines to call the petitioner for interview under the
CAS is quashed. A mandamus is issued to the
University as well as the State Government to extend
the benefit of the CAS to the petitioner, treating him as a
member of the academic staff and a teacher of the
University, after re-classifying his post in such manner
as under the Rules might be appropriate. The reclassification will not entitle the petitioner to claim any
higher emoluments or financial benefits for his past
services, either with the Institute or the University.

50. In view of the orders made in the
leading writ petition, no orders are required to
be made in connected Writ-A No.14778 of
2019, which stands consigned to record.

51. There shall be no order as to costs.

52. Let a copy of this judgment be
communicated to the Principal Secretary,
Technical Education, Government of U.P.,
Lucknow, the Vice Chancellor and the
Registrar of the Harcourt Butler Technical
University,
Kanpur
by
the
Registrar
(Compliance).
----------
(2025) 7 ILRA 406
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 15.07.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.

Writ A No. 7430 of 2025

Babita @ Babita Chandra ...Petitioner
Versus
State Of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Braj Mohan Singh

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.
ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Whether petitioner, having applied for direct
recruitment to the post of Mukhya Sevika
issued
by the U.P. Subordinate Services
Selection Commission, could challenge the
selection process by invoking Rule 4(2) of the
U.P.
Child
Development
and
Nutrition
(Subordinate) Service Rules, 1992, meant for
promotion from amongst Anganbari Workers
possessing High School qualification and ten
years' service.
HEADNOTE
7 All. Babita @ Babita Chandra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
407
U.P. Child Development and Nutrition
(Subordinate) Service Rules, 1992 - Rr.
4(2), 17 & 18 - Recruitment on the post of
Mukhya Sewika - Direct recruitment and
promotion - Distinction - Challenge to
direct recruitment by candidate who
applied thereunder - Estoppel against
challenge.
Held : In the present case, vacancies falling in
the fifty per cent direct recruitment quota were
advertised for direct recruitment to the post of
Mukhya Sevika. it being a case of direct
recruitment through examination by Commission
as contemplated under Rule 17 of the Rules, it
cannot be be confused with recruitment
through Departmental Selection Committee as
contemplated under Rule 18. Rule 17 lays down
the procedure for direct recruitment through the
Commission on the basis of Competitive
examination and interview, whereas Rule 18
provides for the procedure for recruitment by
promotion through the Selection Committee.
Petitioner having applied against vacancy so
advertised could not have questioned the
qualification prescribed under the advertisement
for
she
herself
had
submitted
to
the
advertisement by moving application as per
qualification
mentioned
therein.
Petitioner
cannot be permitted to take plea that selection
process is de hors the procedure as 10 years'
experience on the post of Anganbari Worker
which is prescribed under Rule 4(2) has not
been
taken
into
consideration.
Petition
dismissed. [Paras 12-15] (E-5)
CASE LAW CITED

List of Acts
The U.P. Child Development and Nutrition
(Subordinate) Service Rules, 1992; Constitution
of India, Article 226
List of Keywords
Recruitment - Direct recruitment - Promotion
- Anganbari Worker - Mukhya Sevika -
Qualification - Advertisement - Rule 4(2) -
Rule 17 - Departmental Selection Committee -
Commission - Estoppel - De hors procedure -
Challenge to qualification.
CASE ARISING FROM
Writ
petition
under
Article
226
of
the
Constitution seeking to set aside the entire
selection process undertaken by the U.P.
Subordinate
Services
Selection
Commission
pursuant
to
Advertisement
No.
5Examination/2022 dated 4 July 2022 for
recruitment to the post of Mukhya Sevika.
Appearances for Parties
Advs. For Petitioner: Sri Braj Mohan Singh
Advs. For Respondents: Sri M.C. Chaturvedi,
learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by
Sri Gaurav Singh, Standing Counsel

(Delivered by Hon'ble Ajit Kumar, J.)

1.Instructions filed today are taken on
record.

2.Heard Sri Braj Mohan Singh,
learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
M.C.Chaturvedi,
learned
Additional
Advocate General assisted by Sri Gaurav
Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing
for the State respondents.

3.By means of present petition filed
under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari
408 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
to set aside the entire selection process
undertaken by respondent Commission
pursuant
to
Advertisement
no.
5Examination/ 2022 dated 4th July, 2022.

4.The argument advanced by learned
counsel for the petitioner is that list of
selection pursuant to the selection held is in
total de hors the procedure laid down in
Rule
5(4)(2)
of
the
U.P.
Child
Development and Nutrition (Subordinate)
Service Rules, 1992 (For short Rules,
1992) on the post of Mukhya Sewika so
advertised.

5.Learned counsel for the petitioner
has taken the Court to the relevant rule 4(2)
of the relevant rules that provides for 50
per cent of the recruitment on the post of
Angarnbari Worker to be made through
Selection Committee in accordance with
Rule 15 B of Rules from amongst
Anganwari Worker who are having high
school certificate or equivalent examination
certificate and have 10 years of continuous
service as such and have attained the age of
45 years as on first day of the year of
recruitment. It is further contended that
since petitioner has discharged her duties as
Anganbari
Worker
since
2007,
her
candidature ought to have been considered
under said Rule 4(2) and hence any select
list if prepared ignoring experience of
Anganbari Worker, then selection would be
bad and would be liable to be set aside.

6.Per
contra,
learned
Additional
Advocate General has argued that Rule
1992 that have been cited before the Court
provided two mode of selection one by
way of direct recruitment and the order by
way of promotion through Selection
Committee which is apparent from Rule
4(1) and Rule 4(2) itself. He has further
taken the Court to the Rule 8 of the Rules
that provide for academic qualification and
submits that for the post of Mukhya
Sewika, the essential qualification is
bachelor's degree in Arts, Sociology,
Social Science or Home Science as one of
the subjects or Nutrition and Child
Development or a degree recognized by
Government as equivalent thereto. He
submits that for promotion, as provided,
qualification is only high school or
equivalent and 10 years experience as
Anganbari Worker. According to him in the
present case by advertising vacancies
falling in 50 per cent direct recruitment
quota
vide
advertisement
no.
5
Examination/2022 applications for direct
recruitment have been invited and the
academic qualifications prescribed was
graduate
degree
recognized
from
a
recognized University in the subject of
Social Science or Social Worker or Home
Science as one of the subjects or Nutrition
and Chief Development or any degree
recognized by Government as equivalent
thereto.

7.He has taken the Court to Clause 6
of the advertisement that prescribe for
academic qualification. He further submits
that petitioner had applied for direct
recruitment, and therefore, she could not
have pressed into service Rule 4(2) to ask
the Commission to count her experience as
Anganbari
Worker
because
such
experience deserves to be counted when
vacancy is sought to be filled up by way of
promotion.

8.Meeting
the
above
arguments,
learned counsel for the petitioner sought to
contend in rejoinder that all the posts of
Anganbari Worker have been advertised
instead of 50 per cent quota but upon query
being put to him, he could not give any
details or statistics in support of his
7 All. Babita @ Babita Chandra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
409
argument, nor could show anything from
pleadings as supportive of his argument.

9.Having heard learned counsel for the
respective parties and having perused the
records, I find that Rule 1992 vide its Rule
4 provide for direct recruitment against 50
percent vacancies of Mukhya Sevika and
provide 50 per cent recruitment by way of
promotion through Selection Committee in
accordance with Rules. Rule 4 of the said
rules are reproduced hereunder:

"4. Mukhya Sevika- (1) Fifty per
cent through the Selection Committee from
amongst female candidates on the basis of
competitive examination and interview.

(2) Fifty per cent by direct
recruitment
through
the
Selection
Committee in accordance with Rule 15-B
from amongst High School or equivalent
examination pass. Anganwadi Workers who
have competed ten years continuous service
as such and have not attained the age of
more than forty five years on the first day
of the year of recruitment."

10.Rule 15 provides procedure for
direct recruitment through Departmental
Selection
Committee.
Rules
15
is
reproduced hereunder in its entirety:

"15.
Procedure
for
direct
recruitment through the Departmental
Selection Committee. (1) For the purpose of
direct recruitment there shall be constituted a
Departmental Selection Committee comprising:

(a) Appointing authority, or

(b)
An
officer
belonging
to
Scheduled
Castes
or
Scheduled
Tribes,
nominated by the District Magistrate if the
appointing authority does not belong to
Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes: If the
appointing authority belongs to Scheduled
Castes or Scheduled Tribes an officer other
than belonging to Scheduled Caste or
Scheduled Tribe, to be nominated by the
District Magistrate.

(c) Two officers nominated by the
appointing authority, one of whom shall be an
officer belonging to minority community and
the other one to the backward caste. If such
suitable officers are not available in his
department such suitable officers shall on the
request of the appointing authority, by
nominated by District Magistrate and on his
failure to do so, by reason of non-availability of
suitable officers, such officers shall be
nominated by the Divisional Commissioner.

(2) The Departmental Selection
Committee shall scrutinize the applications and
having regard to the need for securing due
representation of the candidates belonging to
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other
categories under rule 6, call for interview such
number such number of candidates, who fulfil
the requisite qualifications, as it considers
proper.

(3) The Departmental Selection
Committee shall prepare a proficiency list of
candidates in order of merit as disclosed by the
marks obtained in the interview. If two or more
candidates
obtain
equal
marks,
the
Selection Committee arrange their names
in order of merit on the basis of their
general suitability for the post. The number
of the names in the list shall be larger (but
not larger by more than 25 per cent) than
the number of vacancies the Departmental
Selection Committee shall forward the list
to the appointing authority."

11.Then I find Rules 16 provides for
direct recruitment thorough Commission on
410 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the basis of competitive examination and
Rule 17 lays down the same procedure:
Rules 16 and 17 are reproduced hereunder:

"16.
Procedure
for
direct
recruitment through the Commission on the
basis of Competitive examination. (1)
Applications for permission to appear in
the competitive examination shall be
invited
by
the
Commission
in
the
Prescribed pro forma published in the
advertisement issued by them.

(2)
No
candidate
shall
be
admitted to the examination unless he holds
a certificate of admission, issued by the
Commission.

(3) After the results of the written
examination have been received and
tabulated the Commission shall, having
regard
to
need
for
securing
due
representation of the candidates belonging
to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes
and other categories mentioned in rule 6,
prepare a list of candidates who have come
up to the standard fixed by the Commission
in this respect.

(4)
The
Commission
shall
prepare a list of candidates in order of
their proficiency as disclosed by the marks
obtained by each candidate at the written
examination and recommend such number
of candidates as they consider fir for
appointment. If two or more candidates
obtain
equal
marks
in
the
written
examination, the names of the candidates
will be arranged viewing their general
suitability. vacancies. The commission
shall forward the list to the appointing
authority.

17.
Procedure
for
direct
recruitment through the Commission on the
basis of Competitive examination and
interview.-- (1) Applications for permission
to appear in the competitive examination
shall be invited by the Commission in the
prescribed Pro forma published in the
advertisement issued by the Commission.

by more than 25 per cent) than
the number of

(2)
No
candidate
shall
be
admitted to the examination unless he holds
admit card issued by the Commission.

(3) After the results of the written
examination have been received and
tabulated. The Commission shall having
regard to the need for securing during
representation of the candidates belonging
to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes
and other categories under rule 6, summon
for interview such number of candidates as,
on the result of the written examination
have come up to the standard fixed by the
Commission in this respect. The marks
awarded to each candidate at the interview
shall be added to the marks obtained by
him in the written examination.

(4)
The
Commission
shall
prepare a list of candidate in order of their
proficiency as disclosed by the aggregate
of marks obtained by each candidates in
order of their proficiency as disclosed by
the aggregate of marks obtained by each
candidate at the written examination and
interview and recommend such number of
candidates
as
they
consider
fit
for
appointment. If two or more candidates
obtain equal marks in the aggregate, the
name of the candidate obtaining higher
marks in the written examinatio.. shall be
placed higher in the list. The number of
names in the list shall be larger (but not
larger by more than 25 per cent) than the
7 All. Babita @ Babita Chandra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
411
number of vacancies. The Commission
shall forward the list to the appointing
authority."

12.Rules 18 provides for recruitment
through Selection Committee, which runs
as under:

"18. Procedure for recruitment
by
promotion
through
the
Selection
Committee. (1) Recruitment by promotion
shall be made on the basis of seniority
subject to the rejection of unfit through the
Selection Committee to be consisted in
accordance with the provisions of the Uttar
Pradesh Constitution of Departmental
Promotion Committee (for posts outside the
purview of the Public Service Commission)
Rules. 1992

(2) The appointing authority shall
prepare eligibility lists of the candidates in
accordance
with
the
Uttar
Pradesh
Promotion by Selection (on posts outside
the
purview
of
the
Public
Service
Commission) Eligibility List rules, 1986,
and place the same before the Selection
Committee along with their character rolls
and such other record, pertaining to them,
as may be considered proper.

(3) The selection committee shall
consider the cases of candidate on the basis
of the records, referred to in sub-rule (2),
and. if it considers necessary. it may
interview the candidate also.

(4) The selection Committee shall
prepare a list of selected candidates
arranged in order of seniority as it stood in
the cadre from which they are to be
promoted and forward the same to the
appointing authority."

13.Rule
20
also
provides
that
appointment, both in matter of direct
recruitment and through promotion:

"20. Appointment. (1) Subject to
the provisions of sub-rule(2) the appointing
authority shall make appointment by taking
the names of candidates in the order in
which they stand in the lists prepared under
rules 15, 16, 17, 18 or 19 as the case may
be.

(2) Where, in any year of
recruitment appointments are to be made
both
by
direct
recruitment
and
by
promotion regular appointment shall not be
made unless selections are made from both
the sources and a combined list is prepared
in accordance with rule 19.

(3) If more than one order of
appointment are issued in respect of any
one selection a combined order shall also
be issued mentioning the names of persons
in order of seniority as determined in the
selection or as the case may be as it stood
in the cadre from which they are promoted
if the appointments are made both by direct
recruitment and by promotion names shall
be arranged in accordance with the cyclic
order referred to in rule 19."

14.In
order
to
appreciate
the
arguments advanced by learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, it is necessary
to appreciate various provisions contained
under Part-III of the Rules that provide for
recruitment on different posts either by
inviting applications from open market
through Commission on the basis of
competitive examination or by promotion
through Selection Committee or even by
Departmental Selection committee through
open interview.
412 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

Rule 5 of the part-III of recruitment as
prescribed under Rules are reproduced
hereunder:

PART
IIIRECRUITMENT

5.
Source
of
recruitment.-
Recruitment to the various categories of
posts in the service shall be made from the
following sources :

1. Field Reporter-(1) 50 per
cent by direct recruitment through the
Commission on the basis of competitive
examination and interview.

(2) 50 per cent by promotion
through the Selection Committee from
amongst
substantively
appointed Social
Worker, Instructors who have completed
eight years service, as such, on the first day
of the year of recruitmert.

2. Nutritionist.-(1) 50 per cent by
direct recruitment through the Commission
on the basis of competitive examination and
interview.

(2) 50 per cent by promotion
through the Selection Committee from
amongst substantively appointed Health
Instructors who have completed eight years
service, as such on the first day of the year of
recruitment.

3. Law Assistant.-By direct
recruitment through the Commission on the
basis of competitive examination.

4. Mukhya Sevika.-(1) Fifty per
cent through the Selection Committee from
amongst female candidates on the basis of
competitive examination and interview.

(2) Fifty per cent by direct
recruitment through the Selection Committee
in accordance with Rule 15-B from amongst
High School or equivalent examination pass,
Anganwadi Workers who have completed ten
years continuous service as such and have
not attained the age of more than forty five
years on the first day of the year of
recruitment.

Rule
5(4)-Mukhya
SevikaAdvertisement in the order 1995--Amendment
in 1996 and 1998 will not apply--Selection is
valid. Munni Pal...k (Sm.) and others Vs.
Director Mahila and Bal Vikash Vabhag,
U.P.
Lucknow
and
others
(1999)
2
U.P.L.B.E.C. 1275

NOTES. Only women candidates
shall be eligible for appointment to the post
of Mukhya Sevika:

5. Social Work Instructor. -By
direct recruitment through the Commission
on the basis of competitive examination and
interview.

6. Health Instructor. -By direct
recruitment through the Commission on the
basis
of
competitive
examination
and
interview.

7.
Pre-School
Instructor.--By
direct recruitment through the Commission
on the basis of competitive examination and
interview.

STATISTICAL
WING

8.
Statistical
Assistant.-By
promotion through the Selection Committee
from amongst substantively appointed
investigators-cum-Computers
who
have
7 All. Babita @ Babita Chandra Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
413
completed seven years service, as such, on
the first day of the year of recruitment.

9.

Investigator-cumComputer.- By direct recruitment through
the Commission on the basis of Competitive
Examination.

AUDIT WING

10.Senior Auditor-By promotion
through the Selection Committee from
amongst substantively appointed auditors,
who have completed seven years service, as
such, on the first day of the year of
recruitment.

11.

Auditor.-By
direct
recruitment through the Commission on the
basis
of
competitive
examination
and
interview.

ACCOUNT WING

12.
Assistant
Accountant.
(Headquarters).-(1) 50 per cent by direct
recruitment
through
the
Departmental
Selection Committee on the basis of
interview.

(2) 50 per cent by promotion
through the Selection Committee from
amongst substantively appointed Accounts
Clerks who have completed seven years
service, as such on the first day of the year of
recruitment.

13.
Accounts
Clerk.-By
promotion through the Selection Committee
from:
amongst
substantively
appointed
Junior Accounts Clerk who have completed
seven years service, as such on the first day
of the year of recruitment.

14 Junior Accounts Clerk.- By
direct recruitment through the Departmental
Selection Committee on the basis of the
interview.

15.Upon reading of the aforesaid
provisions, it clearly transpires that in the
matter of Field Reporter, 50 percent posts are
to be filled up by direct recruitment through
Commission on the basis of competitive
examination
and
interview
whereas
appointments on 50 percent posts are to be
made by promotion through Departmental
Selection Committee and so also in the case
of Nutritionist and Mukhya Sevika , Assistant
Accountant (Headquarters), whereas in the
matter of Law Assistant, the vacancy is to be
filled
by
direct
recruitment
through
Commission on the basis of Competitive
Examination and so also appointment on the
post of Social Worker Instructor, Health
Instructor Pre- School Instructor- Cum-
Computer Operator.

16.In so far as post of Statistical
Assistant, Senior Auditor, Accounts Clerk are
concerned, appointments are to be made by
promotion through Departmental Selection
Committee whereas in the matter of Junior
Accounts Clerk, the appointment has to be
made
by
direct
recruitment
through
Departmental Selection Committee on the
basis of interview. This three modes of
selection have been provided:

(i). direct recruitment through
Commission on the basis of Competitive
Examination and/or interview;

(ii). by way of promotion through
Departmental Selection Committee on the
basis of competitive examinations and/ or
interview; and
414 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

(iii).
through
Departmental
Selection Committee on the basis of
interview.

17.In so far as Rule 15 is concerned as
already produced above in this judgment, I find
that this Departmental Promotion Committee is
for direct recruitment which provides for
scrutinising the application form in the first
instance and then calling for interview [15 (2)] and
thereafter it will prepare for proficiency list of
candidates in order of merit merit to make
recommendations to the appointing authority for
the purposes of appointment [15(3)] the post of
Junior Accounts Clerk and Mukhya Sevika [5(4)
(14)] only provides for selection through interview
to be conducted by Departmental Selection
Committee, and therefore, in the matter of
Mukhya Sevika, 50 precent post would be filled
up from amongst Anganbari Workers through
Selection Committee under Rule 15-B and not by
way of competitive examination to be conducted
by Commission. Admittedly in the present case,
an advertisement has been issued by the
Commission, hence Rule 16 and 17 would be
attracted in the matter and not Rule 15-B.

18.It is worth noticing that vide Rule 4(2),
the academic qualification for the purposes of
promotion through selection is high school with
10 years' experience as Angabari Worker whereas
Rule 8(4) for the post of Mukhya Sewika, the
essential qualification is bachelors' degree. Rule 8
(4) is reproduced hereunder:

"4. Mukhya Sevika : Essential
qualification- Must possess Bachelor's degree in
Arts with Sociology or Social Work or Home
Science as one of the subjects or Nutrition and
Child India or degree recognize by the
government as equivalent thereto."

19.Now when there are two modes of
recruitment provided, it is required to be seen as to
what mode of recruitment process was undertaken
in the present case and whether petitioner has
made out a case for consideration as per Rule 4(2).
The advertisement was issued in the year 2022
vide
Rule
5-Examination/2022,
requiring
candidates to apply online and prescribing
academic qualification vide clause 6 is as under:

"6- अभनवायव अहवता (शैभक्षक)-

उपयुवि साररणी-1 में उभपलभखत मुख्य सेभवका के
ररि पदों पर चयन के भलए अभ्यथी को भनम्प्नभलभखत अभनवायव अहवताएं
(शैभक्षक व अऩ्य) आवेदन की अंभतम भतभथ तक धाररत करना अपररहायव है-

अनिवार्य अर्यता (शैनिक)- उत्तर रदेश बाल भवकास
सेवा एवं पुिाहार (अधीनस्थ) सेवा भनयमावली, 1992 (यथोसंशोभधत) के
अनुसार अभनवायव अहवता भनम्प्न रकार है-

अभ्यथी, िारत में भवभध द्वारा स्थाभपत भकसी
भवश्वभवद्यालय से एक भविय के रूप में समाजशास्त्र या समाज कायव या गृह
भवज्ञान या पोिण और बाल भवकास के साथ कला में स्नातक उपाभध या
सरकार द्वारा उसके समकक्ष मान्यता राप्त कोई उपाभध रखती हो।

अनिमािी अर्यता-

अन्य बातों के समान होने पर ऐसे अभ्यथी को
सीधी िती के मामले में अभधमान भदया जाएगा, भजसने-

(एक) ग्रामीण क्षेत्रों में बच्चों और मभहलाओं में कपयाण
कायव करने का व्यावहाररक अनुिव हो।

(दो) रादेभशक सेना में न्यूनतम दो विव की अवभध
तक सेवा की हो, या

(तीन) राष्ट्रीय कैडेट कोर का बी रमाण-पत्र राप्त
भकया हो।"

(emphasis added)

20.Petitioner having applied against
vacancy so advertised, in the first instance,
could not have questioned the qualification
prescribed under the advertisement for She
7 All. Aish Mohammad Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
415
herself had submitted to the advertisement
by moving application as per qualification
mentioned therein and secondly, this being
a case of direct recruitment through
competent examination by Commission as
contemplated under rule 17 of the Rules, it
cannot be said to be confused with
recruitment
through
Departmental
Selection
Committee
as
contemplated
under Rule 18.

21.In
view
of
above,
therefore,
petitioner cannot be permitted to take plea
that selection process is de hors the
procedure as 10 years experience on the
post of Anganbari Worker which is
prescribed under Rule 4(2) has not been
taken into consideration.

22.Petition thus being devoid of
merits, is accordingly dismissed.
----------
(2025) 7 ILRA 415
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 21.07.2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.

Writ A No. 7443 of 2025

Aish Mohammad ...Petitioner
Versus
State Of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Shiv Sagar Singh

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Whether a disciplinary proceedings qua
charges that may invite major penalty, in
the absence of oral inquiry is per se bad
and, therefore, any consequential action
pursuant thereto is liable to be held void
ab initio.
HEADNOTE
Service Law - U.P. Government Servant
(Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 - Rule
7
-
Disciplinary
proceedings
-
Requirement of oral inquiry
- Noncompliance - Charges related to the
discharge of quasi judicial exercise of
power of the petitioner as Consolidation
Officer in the matter of objection being
decided under Sections 9 and 12 of the
U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 -
No date for personal hearing or for
inviting any departmental witness to be
examined was fixed - Inquiry Officer held
the petitioner guilty only on his own
assessment of records.

Held: Authority was to consider and appreciate
the documents available on record relating to
the disposal of the proceedings and then the
relevant departmental witnesses ought to have
been examined - As per Rule 7, in the event the
delinquent employee refuses to accept the
charge and even if he does not submit or offer
his explanation, the Inquiry Officer is still bound
in law to hold an oral inquiry in terms of the
examination of departmental witnesses - Oral
inquiry is sine qua non in the matter of
disciplinary proceedings if drawn against the
delinquent employee for major penalty -
Disciplinary proceedings in the absence of oral
inquiry is per se bad and any consequential