Sudha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the State. The facts of the case as recited in the impugned order raises a very short issue for consideration. The matter could have been disposed at this stage as also that the petitioners claim to be covered by a similar order of the Court in CWJC No. 7072 2011. Counsel for the State however submits that he desires adjournment to seek instructions. Rather than to grant adjournment the Court considers it proper to remand the matter to the Principal Secretary, Department of Social Patna High Court CWJC No.2318 of 2012 (2) dt.23-02-2012 2 Welfare, Government of Bihar. The petitioners are stated to be Anganwari Sevikas so appointed on 10.9.1984, 30.7.1984 and 5.8.1984 respectively and claim to have continued as Agents. They are desirous to be considered for the post of Lady Supervisor against the 25 % quota of posts reserved for Anganwari Sevika. It is submitted that they fulfill the other conditions of eligibility for consideration. The only ground mentioned in the provisional merit list prepared, to hold them ineligible, is their appointment as Anganwari Sevika under 18 years of age. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that any issue with regard to their appointment long years ago in 1984 is completely irrelevant under the present advertisement dated 19.6.2010. The petitioners have filed objections denying appointment prior to 18 years of age. The provisional merit list does not mention any other ground of ineligibility. In CWJC No. 7072 of 2011 the Court has held a similar action of the respondents to be unreasonable. Counsel for the State submits that since the matter is being remanded to the Principal Secretary he may be directed to pass appropriate orders. Anganwari Sevikas are not government servants. The standards and conditions that shall apply to government servants shall not apply to Anganwari Sevika. The relationship between a government servant and the government is one of status. The relationship between the Anganwari Sevika and the State Government as the Principal is one of Agent. The relationship is therefore governed by the Indian Contract Act and not the Bihar Service Code or any other Service Rules. The petitioners have filed their objections and disputed the contention of the respondents. Patna High Court CWJC No.2318 of 2012 (2) dt.23-02-2012 3 Under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, a person of the age of majority according to the law to which he is subject and is of sound mind, not otherwise disqualified from entering into a contract is competent to enter in to a contract. The standards by which the respondents profess to act is same standards by which the Court shall test their conduct. If the petitioners came to be appointed as Anganwari Sevika in 1984, allegedly underage, and the respondents wished to take matters back to that date there can be no piecemeal reversion. All issues shall have to be examined as of 1984. This shall include the persons who provided appointment to the petitioners despite being underage as alleged. The Principal Secretary if he desires to debar the petitioners from consideration is directed by this Court to initiate proceedings after verification simultaneously against those who inducted the petitioners. Apart from the same, the State Government has reserved 25% of seats of Lady Supervisors for appointment from Anganwari Sevika. The purpose is salutary to utilize their expertise, given the fact that they must possess minimum of ten years experience as Anganwari Sevika. To reject their candidature only on the ground of an issue with regard to their appointment made in 1984, shall also result in depriving the services of experienced persons in dissemination of a welfare scheme. The respondents have permitted the petitioners to continue since 1984 and they have demonstrated their utility as Anganwari Sevika. Today they are all of majority age. What age they were of in 1984, keeping in mind the relationship of Principal and Agent, is not considered very germane an issue having nexus with their appointment as Lady Supervisor and utility for the experience as an Anganwari Sevika. The respondents are expected to act more prudently and take constructive decision with regard to utility of the petitioners in view of Patna High Court CWJC No.2318 of 2012 (2) dt.23-02-2012 4 their long experience and desirability of the policy decision to appoint experienced persons against the 25% quota rather than to raise issue not relevant and germane today for declining consideration. Let the Principal Secretary now consider the claims of the petitioners in light of the present discussion and dispose it by a reasoned ands speaking order preferably within a maximum period of two weeks from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order. Till such decision is not taken three posts of Lady Supervisor against 25% quota meant of Anganwari Sevika at Hajipur shall be kept reserved for the petitioners The writ application stands disposed. (Navin Sinha, J) Snkumar/-