Page No.# 1/12 vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 5366 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/12 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 16 June, 2025

                                                              Page No.# 1/12

GAHC010208332024




                                                         2025:GAU-AS:7987

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

                         Case No. : WP(C)/6798/2024

         GIRIJA DUTTA AND 27 ORS.
         D/O- LATE AMAL CH. DUTTA, R/O- KACHAMARI, P.O. KACHAMARI BORA
         GAON, P.S. SADAR, PIN- 782002, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM

         2: SMT. PROTIVA BORUAH
         W/O- PROBIN GOGOI
          R/O- KAMARGAON DANAH CHUK
          P.O. AND P.S. KAMARGAON
          PIN- 785619
          DIST. GOLAGHAT
         ASSAM

         3: SMT. JAYANTI DAS
         W/O- RAJEN BISWAKARMA
          R/O- DALAPANI (SOLLONG)
          P.O. BORGHULI
          P.S. PUBTHARIA
          PIN- 782143.
          DIST. NAGAON
         ASSAM

         4: DIPALI SAIKIA
         W/O- LATE DIPAK SAIKIA
          R/O- HAZ GAON
          P.O. RANGAGARA HAZ
          P.S. SADAR
          PIN- 782002
          DIST. NAGAON
         ASSAM

         5: SMT. MADHAN DAS
          D/O- LATE CHAMPESWAR DAS
          R/O- RAHA TOWN
          P.O. AND P.S. RAHA
                                  Page No.# 2/12

PIN- 782103
DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

6: SMT. CHARU SARMAH
W/O- DIBAKAR SARMAH
 R/O- DEWRIGAON
 P.O. DEWRIGAON
 P.S. NONAI
 PIN- 785144
 DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

7: SMT. SAKUNTALA BARUAH
 D/O- WIFE OF TILESWAR BARUAH
 P.O. KACHAMARI
 P.O. KACHAMARI
 P.S. MERAPANI
 PIN- 785705
 DIST. GOLAGHAT
ASSAM

8: SMT. MOMONA RONGMEI
W/O- GAIKILONG RONGMEI
 R/O- KALABIL
 P.O. SIBPUR PT-II
 P.S. LAKHIPUR
 PIN- 788098
 DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM

9: SMT. ANJALI SINGHA
W/O- LATE R.K. SATYAJIT SINGHA
 R/O- GOSSAIPUR PART-I
 P.O. GOSSAIPUR PART-I
 P.S. UDHARBOND
 PIN- 788030
 DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM

10: TH. ALOKA SINGHA
W/O- NILMOHAN SINGHA
 R/O- DHONEHARI PART-III
 P.O. KAZIDAHAR
 PS. SONAI
 PIN- 788115
 DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
                                    Page No.# 3/12


11: SMT. BIJOYA PAUL
 D/O- LATE BINANDA PAUL
 R/O- KABUGANJ
 P.O. KABUGANJ
 P.S. DHOLAI
 PIN- 788121
 DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM

12: SMT. PRABHA RANI PENDEY
W/O- RONGNATH DUBEY
 R/O- RAJGOBINPUR
 P.O. BAGABAZAR
 P.S. DHOLAI
 PIN- 788120
 DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM

13: NAMITA SAIKIA
 D/O- KAMAL CHANDRA SAIKIA
 R/O- POOKARKATA
 P.O. POOKARKATA
 P.S. BHURAGAON
 PIN- 782121
 DIST. MORIGAON
ASSAM

14: SMT. BULU BORA
 D/O- W/O- HARENDRA NARAYAN BORA
 R/O- RAHACHAKI
 P.O. AND P.S. RAHA
 PIN- 782103
 DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

15: SMT. DIPALI DAS
 D/O- LATE DURGA MOHAN DAS
 R/O- CHAPARMUKH
 P.O. CHAPARMUKH
 P.S. RAHA
 PIN- 782425
 DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

16: SMT. SANGITA DAS
W/O- PRASANTA KR. DAS
 R/O- GHAHI BHATIKURI
                              Page No.# 4/12

P.O. GHAHI BHATIKURI
P.S. RAHA
PIN- 782144
DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

17: GITA BAISHYA PANGCHO
W/O- BAGEN PHANGCHO
 R/O- DHARBAM
 P.O. DHOPGURI
 P.S. KHETRI
 PIN- 782403
 DIST. KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM

18: ALEJA BEGUM
W/O- RAMIZ UDDIN AHMED
 R/O- KUBAIKATA
 P.O. AND P.S. BATADRAVA
 PIN- 782122
 DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

19: SMT. BINITA PATGIRI
W/O- GADADHAR KALITA
 R/O- MATIA
 GOALPARA
 P.O. AND PS. MATIA
 PIN- 783125
 DIST. GOALPARA
ASSAM

20: REJIA BEGUM
W/O- MD. SIRAJ UDDIN AHMED
 R/O- BORBHETI
 P.O. KACHAMARI
 P.S. SADAR
 PIN- 782002
 DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

21: PRANITA TALUKDAR
 D/O- NABIN TALUKDAR
 R/O- BATGAON (BALAPARA)
 P.O. AND P.S. CHENGA
 PIN- 781305
 DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
                                 Page No.# 5/12


22: SMT. RAMANI PRABHA DEKA
 D/O- LATE RAJENDRA NATH DEKA
 R/O- WARD NO. 1
 SANTI NAGAR
 P.O. AND P.S. BARPETA ROAD
 PIN- 781315
 DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM

23: SMT. DIPALI KALITA
 D/O- LATE LILAI KALITA
 R/O- ATHGAON
 P.O. AND P.S. DHING
 PIN- 782123
 DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

24: SMT. RANJITA PATHAK NATH
W/O- KAMAKHYA NATH
 R/O- UTTAR SAFAKAMAR
 P.O. GOBARDHANA
 P.S. BARPETA ROAD
 PIN- 781315
 DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM

25: FARIDA YEASMIN
W/O- ABDUL KALAM AZAD
 R/O- SALIMPUR
 P.O. MANNDIA
 PIN- 781308
 DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM

26: RABIA KHATUN
W/O- HABIBUR RAHMAN
 R/O- RAM PUR SATRA
 P.O. KADAMONI
 P.S. BATADRABA
 PIN- 782122
 DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM

27: SMT. MAZEDA KHATUN
W/O- TAIZUDDIN ALI
 R/O- SAFAKAMAR
 P.O. AND P.S. GOBORDHANA
                                                                          Page No.# 6/12

             PIN- 781315
             DIST. BARPETA
             ASSAM

            28: ROMIJA BEGUM BORBHUYAN
            W/O- ABDUR RAHIM BORBHUYAN
             R/O- DAKHIN DEBOSTHAN
             P.O. DEBOSTHAN BAZAR
             P.S. MURAJHAR
             PIN- 7824481
             DIST. HOJAI
            ASSA

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
            GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR,
            GUWAHATI-6, KAMRUP(M), ASSAM

            2:THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE
            ASSAM
             GUWAHATI
             KAMRUP(M)
            ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR. P K BORAH,MR P H KONWAR

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,




                                  BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

                                           ORDER

Date : Date: 16.06.2025

Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T. C. Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, representing the respondents.

2. The petitioners, by way of instituting the present proceeding, have prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities for the following reliefs: -

Page No.# 7/12

"It is therefore prayed that your Lordships may be pleased to admit this petition, and issue Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction should not be issued setting aside and quashing the order dated 16/08/2021 so far as the same relates to be claim of past benefit, and/or why a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction of like nature should not be issued directing the respondent authority in terms of the Judgment and Order dated 20/06/2022 passed in WP(C) no. 7215/2018 to give retrospective effect of their initial appointment as Supervisor made on 06/02/2016 including the balance monthly salaries which is to be calculated in terms of scale which the petitioner would have been otherwise paid and/or to any other appropriate writ, order or direction should not be issued to and/or call for the records and on perusal thereof and after hearing the parities may be pleased to make the Rule absolute and/or may be pleased to pass such further or other orders as your Lordships may deem fit and proper."

3. As projected in the present proceeding, the petitioners were engaged as Anganwadi Worker in different Anganwadi Centres. The Central Government in the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of Women and Child Development had issued a Notification dated 28.04.1985 to the different Integrated Child Development Projects operationalized in different States to reserve certain percentage of posts of supervisors, for being filled up by recruitment from amongst Anganwadi Workers who had the matriculation qualification and had put it a minimum of 10 years of service. The said provision with regard to recruitment of Anganwadi Workers against the post of Supervisors in the State of Assam was so notified only in the year 2012 vide issuance of a Notification dated 04.06.2012. However, it is projected that even after the issuance of said Notification dated 04.06.2012, no action was taken by the authorities for considering the cases of eligible Anganwadi Workers for recruitment against the post of Supervisors.

Page No.# 8/12

4. The Association representing the petitioners herein had approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 4862 of 2015. This Court upon considering the issues arising in the said writ petition, and also by recording the submissions of the departmental counsel that the process for appointment of eligible Anganwadi Workers to the cadre of Supervisors, was under process and would be completed by 31.12.2015, proceeded to dispose of the writ petition by directing the State respondents to complete the process involved.

5. It is projected that the petitioners on their selection for appointment against the posts of Supervisors were vide an order dated 06.02.2016, issued by the Director of Social Welfare Department, Assam, appointed as Supervisors, however, their such appointments were denoted to be contractual and for fixed period of 3 years. The petitioners were also only authorized a fixed pay on their recruitment against the post of Supervisors.

6. Being aggrieved, persons similarly situated like the petitioners approached this court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C) No. 7215/2018 (Ms. Bobby Deka & 16 others Vs. the State of Assam).

7. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 20.06.2022, on considering the issues arising in the said writ petition was pleased to allow the same. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the said judgment and order dated 20.06.2022, noticed the fact that the petitioners therein were vide order dated 16.08.2021 given the benefits of regular appointment against the post of Supervisors. Accordingly, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court was of the view that the benefits so extended vide order dated 16.08.2021, is to be given retrospective effect from the date of their initial appointments against the post of Supervisors effected on 06.02.2016. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court, further proceeded to direct that the retrospective effect given to the order dated 16.08.2021 the salaries of the petitioners therein would have to be computed w.e.f. 06.02.2016, in the scale of pay authorized to the post of Supervisors and the arrears working out be paid to the petitioners therein. The operative portion Page No.# 9/12

of the said judgment and order dated 20.06.2022, being relevant, is extracted herein below:-

"15. The rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties have been considered and the materials placed before this Court has been carefully examined. The issue which calls for a determination is whether the initial promotion of the petitioners to the post of Supervisors could have been made on a fixed pay and tenure and as to whether such promotion could have been treated as mere engagements. As a corollary, it is also to be decided that if the principal issue is held in favour of the petitioners, from which date the petitioners are to be held to be entitled to the benefits of a regular Supervisor.

16. To decide the aforesaid issue, it would be necessary to go back to the basis of filing the present case which is the communication dated 28.04.1995 of the Government of India. By the said communication, while the Government was considering increase in the honorarium and other benefits of Anganwadi Workers, a decision was already taken to reserve minimum 25% posts of Supervisors for selection from Anganwadi Workers who are Matriculates and having minimum 10 years of experience. Even assuming for arguments sake that the contents of the said communication is not a guideline as tried to be projected on behalf of the State, the subsequent notification by the State dated 04.06.2012 would be of vital importance as it is by this notification that 25% reserve quota was introduced. While doing so, the State Government did not even indicate that the mode of recruitment to the posts of Supervisors would have any cascading effect on the service conditions of the promotional posts of Supervisors. Further, what is more intriguing is that the notification was not given effect to for which the Association of Anganwadi Workers had to approach this Court by means of a writ petition being WP(C)/4862/2015 and it was only thereafter when the recruitment process was initiated. Though the case of Seimens (supra) was cited, the same may not have any direct relevance as by the subsequent order dated 16.08.2021 passed during the pendency of the present writ Page No.# 10/12

petition is not to the prejudice of the petitioners but is only a measure to redress their grievance, though partially.

17. It transpires that the recruitment process was initiated vide the communication dated 01.10.2015 wherein, the petitioners were amongst the successful Anganwadi Workers who were selected for promotion to the post of Supervisors. After going through the selection process and being promoted to the post of Supervisors, there was no reason as to how the petitioners could be deprived of substantive appointment and rather were given contractual appointment, that too for a fixed period and pay. There is no doubt that the cadre of Supervisor is one and the same and therefore, whether one is appointed directly in the 75% of the vacancies or promoted after selection from Anganwadi Worker in the reserved 25% quota cannot make any difference in their service conditions as Supervisors. Rather, this Court is of the opinion that the cadre of Supervisor is a homogeneous one where the mode of entry into the said cadre would be wholly irrelevant. On a specific query by this Court, it has been clarified that there is no difference in the duties discharged by a directly recruited Supervisor or one who is promoted from Anganwadi Worker. Further, the recruitment process for Supervisors which was initiated by the communication dated 01.10.2015 was only to fill up 25% quota reserved for Anganwadi Workers and not for some other posts belonging to a different cadre. The learned State Counsel has also clarified that as on August, 2021, there were 924 nos. of Supervisors out of which 647 were directly recruited and in the year 2016, 277 nos. were promoted from the rank of Anganwadi Workers.

18. Though a frail argument was advanced on behalf of the State with regard to financial concurrence, this Court is of the opinion that the same cannot be a ground to deprive the legal entitlement of an incumbent who is inducted into the services by following the due process of law. Rather, it is the bounden duty of the Department to obtain prior approval from all the concerned Departments including the Finance Department before starting the recruitment process and such approval is assumed to Page No.# 11/12

have been obtained. Further, in the instant case, though the initial communication of the Government of India was of the year 1995, the Rules were amended only in the year 2012 and the recruitment process initiated in October, 2015 that too, after filing of a writ petition by the Association.

19. As would appear from the affidavit-in-opposition that finally vide orders dated 16.08.2021 (or of nearby dates) the petitioners have been given the benefit of a regular appointment, this Court is of the opinion that such benefits are to be given retrospective effect from the date of their initial appointment made on 06.02.2016. Such retrospective effect would also include the balance of the monthly salaries which is to be calculated in terms of scale which the petitioners would have been otherwise paid and the arrears be released to them accordingly. All other benefits including fitment in the appropriate scale of pay, seniority etc. are also directed to be given to the petitioners. The aforesaid direction is given in view of the fact that there is no dispute with regard to the nature of the service discharged by the petitioners as Supervisors and are part of the same cadre of Supervisors which also includes regular appointee in the rest 75% of the vacancies."

8. On a comparison of the service particulars of the petitioner in the present proceedings and the service particulars of the petitioners in the case of Ms. Bobby Deka (supra), it is found that both sets of petitioners were appointed, on their selection, as Supervisors on contractual basis w.e.f. 06.02.2016; and thereafter, they were so appointed on regular basis vide issuance of the order dated 16.08.2021 by the Director, Social Welfare Assam. Accordingly, it is to be held that the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ms. Bobby Deka (supra) shall also squarely apply to the case of the petitioners in the present proceeding and they would also be entitled to similar benefits. Accordingly, the regular appointments effected in case of the petitioners vide the order dated 16.08.2021 is required to be given a retrospective effect i.e., w.e.f. 06.02.2016. The petitioners would now be entitled to a regular scale of pay as authorized to the post of Supervisors w.e.f. 06.02.2016.

Page No.# 12/12

Accordingly, the respondents shall compute the arrears of pay and allowances receivable by the petitioners w.e.f., 06.02.2016.

9. The arrear so working out shall be released to the petitioners within a period of 45 (forty-five) days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The arrears now receivable by the petitioners would be so released to them after deducting the remuneration so received by them w.e.f. 06.12.2016 on their appointment as Supervisors on contractual basis.

10. With the above observations and direction, the present writ petition stands allowed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant