MANIBEN MAGANBHAI BHARIYA v. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DAHOD & Ors.

) (Supplementing) – Honorarium paid to Anganwadi workers/helpers is basically the quantum of money offered /conferred to somebody who is especially a professional or a well honoured person for providing services – It is a voluntary process – However, what is being paid to Anganwadi workers /helpers with a nomenclature used by the respondents in projecting the term ‘honorarium’, is in fact the ‘wages’ that has been paid for the services rendered at the end of the month – It is the form of emoluments which is being earned on discharge of duty in accordance with the terms of employment defined u/s.2(s) of the 1972 Act – National Food Security 760 MANIBEN MAGANBHAI BHARIYA v. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DAHOD 761 Act, 2013 – ss. 4, 5 and 6 – Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 – Public Health – Anganwadi centres. A Public Health – Anganwadi centres – Role of – Duty of the State to improve the level of nutrition – Held (per Abhay S. Oka, J.): Apart from Art.47 of the Constitution, India is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights – The said convention casts responsibilities on all States to recognize the right of citizens to adequate food – As provided in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 2013 Act, one of its objectives is to improve the nutritional status of women and children – The object of the 2013 Act was to bring about a shift in addressing the issue of food security – The approach was changed from the welfare approach to the rights-based approach – Role of Anganwadi centres finds a place in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 2013 Act – Constitution of India – Art. 47 – National Food Security Act, 2013 Interpretation of Statutes – Beneficial Interpretation – Held (per Ajay Rastogi, J.): When social security legislations are being interpreted, it always has to be interpreted liberally with a beneficial interpretation and has to be given the widest possible meaning which the language permits – When a statute is meant for the benefit of a particular class and if a word in the statute is capable of two meanings, i.e., one which would preserve the benefits and one which would not, then the former is to be adopted. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: PER ABHAY S. OKA, J.

It is the duty of the State to improve the level of nutrition which is one of the best methods to improve public health. Anganwadi centres were statutorily recognised under the National Food Security Act, 2013. Anganwadi centres have been entrusted with a very vital and significant role in implementing Sections 4 to 6 of the 2013 Act. It can be said that Anganwadi centres perform a pivotal role in discharging the statutory obligation of the State to provide nutritional support to pregnant women, lactating mothers and children in the age group of 6 months to 6 years. [Paras 8, 9, 10 and 12][773-F-G; 774-A-B, C; 776-D-E] B C D E F G H 762 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 5 S.C.R. A B C D E F G H

In view of the provisions of the 2013 Act and Section 11 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act), Anganwadi centres also perform statutory duties. Therefore, even AWWs and AWHs perform statutory duties under the said enactments. The Anganwadi centres have, thus, become an extended arm of the Government in view of the enactment of the 2013 Act and the Rules framed by the Government of Gujarat. The Anganwadi centres have been established to give effect to the obligations of the State defined under Article 47 of the Constitution. It can be safely said that the posts of AWWs and AWHs are statutory posts. In view of the changes brought about by the 2013 Act and the aforesaid Rules framed by the Government of Gujarat, the law laid down by this Court in the case of Ameerbi will not detain this Court any further from deciding the issue. The decision in the case of Ameerbi will not have any bearing on the issue involved in these appeals. [Paras 18 and 19][780-G-H; 781-A-C] State of Karnataka and others v. Ameerbi and others, 2007 (11) SCC 681 : [2006] 10 Suppl. SCR 329 –held inapplicable.

It is impossible to accept the contention that the job assigned to AWWs and AWHs is a part-time job. In the State of Gujarat, the Government Resolution dated 25th November, 2019 lays down exhaustive provisions regarding selection criteria, duties, disciplinary action, rules, etc. in respect of AWWs and AWHs. In fact, by the said Resolution, the State Government has framed the Anganwadi Worker/Helper (Selection Criteria, Honorary Service, Review and Discipline) Rules. The Government Resolution dated 25th November 2019, which prescribes duties of AWWs and AWHs, does not lay down that their job is a part-time job. Considering the nature of duties specified thereunder, it is full-time employment. [Paras 13 and 20][781-D-E; 777-A-B]

Sub-sections (3) and (3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 deal with the applicability of its provisions. Clause (b) of Section 1(3) applies to every shop or establishment within the meaning of any law for the time being in force in relation to the shops and establishments in a State in which ten or more persons MANIBEN MAGANBHAI BHARIYA v. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DAHOD 763 are employed or were employed on any day of the preceding twelve months. The question is whether clause (b) of Section 1(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 will apply. This Court in the case of the Labour Court, Jullunder has given a wide interpretation to clause(b). ‘Establishments’ contemplated by clause (b) can be establishments within the meaning of any law for the time being in force in a State in relation to establishments. Establishments have been defined in clause (e) of Section 2 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.

The definition of ‘wages’ is very wide. It means all emoluments which are earned by an employee on duty. Thus, the honorarium paid to AWWs and AWHs will also be covered by the definition of wages. As AWWs and AWHs are employed by the State Government for wages in the establishments to which the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 applies, the AWWs and AWHs are employees within the meaning of the 1972 Act. In view of the said Rules of the Gujarat Government, the Anganwadi centres are not under the control of the Central Government. Therefore, the State Government will be an appropriate Government within the meaning of clause (a) of Section 2 of the 1972 Act. Accordingly, a person or authority appointed by the appropriate Government for the supervision and control of AWWs and AWHs will be the employer within the meaning of clause (f) of Section 2. [Para 29][787-B-D]

Further, the Government of India by a notification dated 3rd April 1997 has notified educational institutions as establishments under clause (c) of sub¬section (3) of Section 1 of the 1972 Act. In the Anganwadi centres, the activity of running a preschool for the children in the age group of 3 to 6 years is being conducted. It is purely an educational activity. The job of teaching is done by AWWs and AWHs. The State Government is running pre-schools in Anganwadi centres in accordance with Section 11 of the RTE Act. [Para 30][787-D-F]

The provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 apply to AWWs and AWHs working in Anganwadi centres. Within a period of three months from today, necessary steps shall be taken by the concerned authorities in the State of Gujarat under the 1972 Act to extend benefits of the said Act to the eligible AWWs and AWHs. [Para 32][788-B-C]