Archana Majumdar @ Archana Mazumdar v. The State of Assam and 6 Ors

ORDER Date : 04-11-2024

Heard Mr. A. R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner who submits that by filing this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the appointment/promotion of the Respondent No. 6 to the post of Anganwadi Worker in Singimari Bhagania Anganwadi Centre under the Chhaygaon ICDS Project, Kamrup.

¶2According to the petitioner she has rendered her services as Anganwadi Worker for a few months on stopgap basis and that she is eligible to be considered for appointment as Anganwadi Worker on regular basis. The Private Page No.# 3/6 Respondent No. 6 on the other hand was working as Anganwadi Helper under the said Anganwadi centre and after the post of Anganwadi Worker felt vacant, she prayed for being considered to the post of Anganwadi Worker, but, as the same was not done she filed a writ petition before this Court, the same being WP(C) No. 168 of 2015. The writ petition was disposed of vide order dated

21.05.2015 by directing the Director of Social Welfare, Assam to consider the representation filed by her and to consider her for promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker from the post of Anganwadi Helper within a time frame of 3 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

¶3It is pursuant to the said direction, that the respondent authorities took up the consideration for promotion of as many as four (4) Anganwadi Helpers under different centres including the centre concerned in the said writ petition for promotion of Anganwadi Helpers to the post of Anganwadi Worker. The name of the Private Respondent No. 6 also was forwarded by the District Elementary Education Officer concerned for consideration and consequently, the Director of Social Welfare Department gave approval to the names forwarded to him which included the name of the Respondent No. 6 vide approval dated

15.02.2020.

¶4It is however the case of the petitioner that the Respondent No. 6 does not possess the requisite educational qualification and that the Director of Social Welfare noticing the discrepancy in the educational qualification produced by her had directed the District Elementary Officer, Kamrup (R) to look into the matter and take the final decision on the educational qualification of the Respondent No. 6. According to the petitioner the District Elementary Education Officer thereafter has not taken any final decision and without doing so, the name of Respondent No. 6 was recommended and finally approved for Page No.# 4/6 promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker.

¶5Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents has produced the relevant records wherein it is seen that four names were approved by the Director of Social Welfare Department for promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker from the post of Anganwadi Helper which included the name of the Respondent No. 6 as well. The records however does not reveal as to what decision had been taken by the District Elementary Education Officer, Kamrup (R) pursuant to the communication dated 15.06.2015 made by the Director of Social Welfare Department.

¶6Mr. I. Ahmed, learned counsel for Respondent No. 6 submits that the Respondent No. 6 possesses the requisite qualification both in work experience and in education as well. Her case was duly considered by the competent authority, thereafter recommended for promotion and finally approved by the Director of Social Welfare Department for her promotion. Therefore, there is no reason for doubting the fitness of the Respondent No. 6 for being promoted to the post of Anganwadi Worker. He also submits that the petitioner otherwise do not have the locus standi to challenge the appointment/promotion of the Respondent No. 6.

¶7Mr. D.K. Roy, learned counsel for Respondent No. 7 submits that during the year 1991-1992 there was no provision for registration of students in Class-IX and that registration started only in the year 1996. In that view of the matter, the verification in respect of the registration of Respondent No. 6 in Class-IX in the year 1991-1992 could not be done by the Board of Secondary Education, Assam. Page No.# 5/6

¶8Upon hearing the learned counsels for the rival parties, this Court is of the considered view that notwithstanding the approval said to have been given to the Director of Social Welfare to promote the Respondent No. 6 to the post of Anganwadi Worker from the post of Anganwadi Helper, having regard to the communication dated 15.06.2015 made by the Director of Social Welfare Department requiring the District Elementary Education Officer, Kamrup (R) to take a final decision on the educational qualification of the Respondent No. 6, the District Elementary Education Officer concerned shall therefore look into the matter as written in the said communication and take a final decision on the educational qualification of the Respondent No. 6. If the Respondent No. 6 is not found to be qualified upon such consideration, the approval given in favour of Respondent No. 6 shall stand compromised and the post of Anganwadi Worker should be filled up by considering eligible persons and further, in the event the same is done, the petitioner shall also be given a fair chance to participate. On the other hand if the approval given by the Director of Social Welfare Department to the promotion of the Respondent No. 6 is pursuant to the finding already arrived at by the District Elementary Education Officer on the educational qualification of the Respondent No. 6, the approval given for appointment of the Respondent No. 6 as communicated on 15.02.2020 shall be sustained and not disturbed. If such exercise had not been completed as already observed herein above, the District Elementary Education Officer concerned shall do the needful within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. If such exercise is to be undertaken, it is made clear that fair opportunity of personal hearing shall be given to Respondent No. 6 before taking a final decision.

¶9With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands Page No.# 6/6 disposed of.

¶10The interim order passed earlier shall stand merged with this order.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/6 GAHC010046972020 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/1464/2020o ARCHANAoMAJUMDARo@oARCHANAoMAZUMDARo W/O-oSANJAYoROY,oVILL.oSINGIMARI,oP.O.oALIKASH,oP.S.oCHHAYGAON,o DIST.-oKAMRUPo(ASSAM). VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo6oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoCOMM.oANDoSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,oSOCIALo WELFAREoDEPTT.,oDISPUR,oGHY.-06. 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoSOCIALoWELFARE oASSAM oUZANBAZAR oGHY.-01. 3:THEoPROGRAMMEoOFFICER oDIVISIONALoICDSoCELL oKAMRUP(M) oBELTOLA oGHY.-o28. 4:THEoDISTRICToSOCIALoWELFAREoOFFICER oKAMRUP oAMINGAON oPINo781031. 5:THEoCHILDoDEVELOPMENToPROJECToOFFICER oCHHAYGAONoICDSoPROJECT oCHHAYGAON oDIST.-oKAMRUP oASSAM oPIN-o781124. Page No.# 2/6 6:SMTI. JOYMATI ROY W/O- ANANDA ROY VILL. SINGIMARI P.O. ALIKASH P.S. CHHAYGAON DIST.- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN- 781137. 7:THE SECRETARY BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R SIKDAR, MD A ALI,MR J HUSSAIN,MR. L HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. R MAZUMDAR, SC, EDUCATION DEPTT.,MR. D DOLEY,SC, SEBA (R-7),MR. T CHUTIA, SC, SEBA (R-7),MR I AHMED (R6) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO