Smt. Sanjulata Giri and Others vs State of Orissa and Others

M.M. Das, J.

Initially four petitioners filed this Writ Application praying for a direction directing the opposite parties to appoint them as Anganwadi Workers after quashing the order under Annexure-3. During pendency of the Writ Application, Petitioner No. 4 having expired, her name has been deleted from the cause title of this case. The Petitioner No. 3 has also been absorbed as Anganwadi Worker, in the meantime. Thus, this petition is confined to the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2.

Pursuant to an advertisement inviting applications for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Workers (100 posts), by the Child Development Project Officer, Champua (Annexure-1), more than 700 applications were received. The petitioners were also applicants for the said post. After scrutiny of the applications, the petitioner being found eligible received call letters to attend the interview and were also directed to produce the original documents at the time of interview. By letter dated 5.2.1996 under Annexure-2, the petitioners were intimated to have been selected for appointment as Anganwadi Workers and were directed to report for duty within ten days from the date of receipt of the said order. Further case of the petitioners is that when they reported before the Child Development Project Officer to join in their duties, they were not allowed to join and they were told that by letter dated 7.2.1996, Opp. Party No. 5 has kept all appointments pursuant to Annexure-2, in abeyance. The said letter dated 7.2.1996 (Annexure-3) also indicated that the Government has taken a decision not to give effect to the offer of appointments to the candidates who were selected in the interview. Initially, it appears that the petitioners approached the Administrative Tribunal but ultimately as their application was found to be not maintainable before the said Tribunal, they have filed the present Writ Petition.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that allegations were made by the then M.L.A., Champua and M.L.A., Patna, alleging corruption and irregularities in the process of selection of Anganwadi Workers in 11 (eleven) Anganwadi Centres and on the basis of the said allegations, the entire process of selection was thrown out of gear, without due application of mind. He further submitted that the Collector of the District was requested to stop the appointment by letter under Annexure-4 and the Collector by letter dated 15.4.1996 under Annexure-5 after due inquiry, intimated the Director, Social Welfare-cum-Addl. Secretary to Government of Orissa, that out of the selected candidates, 79 candidates are to be appointed and for other centres, fresh selection is to be conducted. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the said decision of the Collector is arbitrary, illegal and without any basis and the petitioners having been successful in interview and having been issued with their appointment letters, they are entitled to a direction directing the opposite parties to allow them to join pursuant to their appointment letters.

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite parties, inter alia, stating that since there were allegations of irregularity in the process of selection of Anganwadi Workers at Champua ICDS, the State Government vide Annexure-4 directed to stop the engagement. The Addl. District Magistrate, Keonjhar as per direction of the Government, conducted an enquiry into the matter. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that due to the stay order passed in the Original Application No. 959(C)/96 by the State Administrative Tribunal as no further recruitment was made and the project for Supplementary Nutrition Programme and for Pre-School Education suffered serious set back, the Collector, Keonjhar, directed to issue appointment letters to seven centres with respect to which there was no report of irregularity.

A rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the petitioners controverting the statements made in the counter affidavit. By order dated 18.6.2001, this Court granted time, on the request of the Learned Counsel for the State, to enable him to get instruction whether the case of the petitioners can be considered and they can be appointed in other Anganwadi Centres not belonging to the Scheduled Tribe pockets. Pursuant to the said order, the Collector, Keonjhar has filed an affidavit where it is stated that 21 posts of Anganwadi Workers are still lying vacant and only Petitioner No. 3 can be adjusted. Accordingly, Petitioner No. 3 has been absorbed.

It appears that the case of the Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 was considered by the Collector by taking the present guidelines with regard to appointment of Anganwadi Workers, into consideration and not the guidelines for such purpose which was in force at the time of issuance of appointment letters to the petitioners under Annexure-2. On that basis it has been stated in the affidavit that by taking into consideration the marks secured by the Petitioner No. 1 in the matriculation examination, her rank comes in the third position and the Petitioner No. 2 being a non-matriculate, both the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are not eligible to be appointed as Anganwadi Workers as per the present guidelines.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners, on the contrary, submitted that the guidelines governing the case of the petitioners prescribed that the minimum eligible qualification in Class-VII pass and not matriculation. Further, the petitioners were subjected to tests and interviews and thereafter were selected for appointment as per the prevalent guidelines then. He submitted that in view of such position, the Collector, Keonjhar was in error in applying the guidelines framed in the year 2000 to the case of the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and thereby stating in the affidavit that they are not eligible to be appointed.

Considering the submissions made, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 having been subjected to selection process in accordance with the guidelines applicable at the relevant time and having been duly selected and there being no allegation of irregularities in the process of selection, in the Anganwadi Centres for which the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 faced the tests, it is not open for the opposite parties to hold, the said Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are ineligible for appointment, by applying fresh guidelines framed in the year 2000 and thereby stating that they are not eligible to be appointed. Further, it being evident from enquiry report that there were no irregularities in the process of recruitment in the Anganwadi Centres for which the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were the applicants, the action of the Director, Social Welfare Department in issuing Annexure-4, stopping the appointment to all the selected candidates in the project under ICDS, Champua with respect to all the Anganwadi Centres was uncalled for and is unsustainable.

In this view of the matter, the letter under Annexure-4 stands quashed. It is further directed that the Opposite Party No. 5-Child Development Project Officer, Champua, who issued the initial appointment letters, shall issue fresh appointment letters to the petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 for appointment them as Anganwadi Workers in the respective Anganwadi Centres. This should be done within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order from the petitioners who shall produce the same before the Opp. Party No. 5.

The Writ Application is, accordingly, allowed, but in the circumstances without costs.