Rita Das vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 4450 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010030112018




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                           Case No. : WP(C)/1028/2018

         RITA DAS
         W/O. SRI HEMANTA DAS, VILL. GOPINIPARA (KALITAPARA), P.O.
         GOALPARA, DIST. GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN-783101



         VERSUS


         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
         REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
         SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.


         2:THE DIRECTOR
          SOCIAL WELFARE
         ASSAM
          UZANBAZAR
          GUWAHATI-1.


         3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
          GOALPARA
          GOALPARA
         ASSAM
          PIN-783101


         4:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER
          GOALPARA
          GOALPARA
         ASSAM
          PIN-783101
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

            5:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER
             KRISHNAI BALIJANA ICDS PROJECT
            AGIA
             GOALPARA
            ASSAM
             PIN-78313

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. U N CHETIA

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM




                                 BEFORE
            HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

                                          ORDER

Date : 14-11-2022

Heard Mr. N.C. Ojah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondents in the Social Welfare Department of the Government of Assam.

2. The petitioner was engaged as an Anganwadi worker in the Gopinipara Anganwadi Centre under Krishnai Balijana Twin ICDS Project as per the

communication No. CDPO(KB)120/New Appointment/1st Part/2008-2009/286 dated 12.03.2015 of the Child Development Project Officer, Krishnai Balijana ICDS Project. The communication of engagement provides that the petitioner was engaged for a period of three months as an Anganwadi worker. In paragraph 4 of the writ petition, a statement is made that although the initial engagement was for a period of three months, but as per the verbal order of the authorities the petitioner is continuing in her service as an Anganwadi worker and there is no formal order of extension and she is paid an honorarium of Rs. 3,000/- per month. In the circumstance, this writ petition is instituted seeking for a direction to the respondents that the petitioner be appointed as an Page No.# 3/4

Anganwadi worker on a regular basis.

3. Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondents has made a submission that the Anganwadi workers are appointed as per a Central Government sponsored scheme and are governed by a set of guidelines framed for the purpose. Mr. D. Nath also refers to a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka & Ors. vs. Ameerbi & Ors. reported in (2007) 11 SCC 681, wherein it had been held that the post of Anganwadi worker is not a public post but a post under a scheme which is governed by the guidelines framed for the purpose.

4. Accordingly, it is the submission of Mr. D. Nath that in respect of an Anganwadi Centre, there is no regularization in service. A further statement is made by Mr. D. Nath that as the petitioner had been engaged as an Anganwadi worker in the Gopinipara Anganwadi Centre and is continuing till date and she would be retained as such by the authorities till either the post or the centre itself remains in existence, but with an exception if there is any misconduct or other acts on the part of the petitioner, she may be removed by following due procedure of law.

5. In view of such statement, we are not required to issue any direction as prayed for in this writ petition for regularizing the services of the petitioner, but at the same time, take note that the petitioner would be continued to be engaged as an Anganwadi worker in the Gopinipara Anganwadi Centre till such time either the post remains or the centre remains, unless the petitioner is required to be removed from service otherwise by following the due procedure of law. Accordingly, the petitioner may be continued in service as indicated above subject to what has been provided and taking note of it, the writ petition stands closed. It is needless to say that for the engagement, the petitioner Page No.# 4/4

would be paid the honorarium as may be admissible under law from time to time.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant