High Court · 2012

2. The grievance raised in the writ petitions pertain to selection and appo intment of Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers under the Social Welfare Depa rtment, Assam. Grievance raised and relief sought for being the same, the writ p etitions have been taken up for analogous hearing and are being disposed of by t his common order. 3. Petitioners’ case in WP(C) No.6450/2010 in a nutshell is that they havin g requisite qualification, applied for the post of Anganwadi worker and helper r espectively for No.23-Laskar Nagar Chuburi Anganwadi Centre pursuant to the adve rtisement issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Binnakandi ICDS Proje ct, Doboka for filling up some posts of Anganwadi Workers and Helper in differen t centre under said project including No.23-Laskar Nagar Chuburi Anganwadi Centr e.

4. Petitioners duly appeared in the interview held on 03.10.2009 and 04.10. 2009 respectively. They were the only local candidates appearing in the intervie w for the said posts. Petitioners’ noticed that the respondent Nos. 8 & 9, who d o not belong to the said Anganwadi Centre also appeared in the interview for the posts in question without fulfilling the essential criteria as per Clause 2 of the advertisement notice, which stipulates that the candidates must be a residen t of the same area where the centre is situated.

5. Petitioners raised objection before the authorities on the candidatures of respondent Nos.8 and 9 for the posts of Anganwadi Workers and Helpers for No. 23-Laskar Nagar Chuburi Anganwadi Centre, but was of no avail. Thereafter, the S ub-Divisional Officer(C), Hojai, Sankardevnagar conducted an enquiry over the ma tter on receiving a representation submitted thereon.

6. The Enquiry Officer submitted the enquiry report before the SDO(C) Hojai with a finding that the respondent Nos.8 & 9 do not belong to the area situated under No.23-Laskar Nagar Chuburi Anganwadi Centre. Accordingly the SDO (C) Hoja i, vide a letter alongwith the enquiry report requested the Circle Officer, Dobo ka Revenue Circle, the Chairman of the Selection Board, to take necessary action as per Government guidelines & enquiry report. But the Circle Officer, Doboka R evenue Circle did not take any action on the report so submitted by the SDO(C) H ojai, thereby allowing the ineligible candidates to hold the posts in question. Being aggrieved, the petitioners are before this Court with the instant writ pet ition.

7. The petitioner’s case in WP(C) No. 1038/2010 is that the petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Helper and in WP(C) No.1045/2011, the petitioner was app ointed as Anganwadi Worker. The petitioners were duly selected and appointed to the post of Anganwadi Helper and Anganwadi Worker respectively at Laskarnagar, A nganwadi Centre Chuburi under Binnakandi ICDS Project, Doboka, Nagaon. They join ed in the post and discharged duties to the satisfaction of all concerned. Howev er, some vested interested persons made allegations against them with regard to their residential status alleging that the petitioners do not belong to Laskarna gar Chuburi under Binnakandi, ICDS Project, Doboka, Nagaon Anganwadi Centre. Aft er receipt of the allegation, an enquiry was conducted by the Election Officer, Hojai and on the basis of the enquiry the appointment letters issued to the peti tioners were cancelled vide office order dated 12.01.2011, which are under chall enge in the instant writ petition.

8. It is submitted by Mr. Atia that the Government of Assam in the Social W elfare Department is following the guidelines framed and circulated by the Gover nment of Assam in the Social Welfare Department and as per terms and conditions laid therein, candidates in the posts of Anganwadi Worker and Anganwadi Helper are appointed. In terms of the aforesaid guidelines, the candidate for the post of Anganwadi Worker and Anganwadi Helper shall be a local women residing in the same area where the Anganwadi Centre is located. This is, apart from the settled conditions stipulated in the said guidelines. Therefore, in the advertisement i ssued for the posts of Anganwadi Worker and Anganwadi Helper, it was specificall y stipulated that the candidates must be inhabitants of the Anganwadi Centre/War d.

9. Mr. Atia appearing for the petitioner in WP(C) No.6450/2010 has submitte d that the private respondent Nos. 8 and 9 who have been selected for appointmen t are not the residents of the area relating to the Anganwadi Centre which have also been reflected in the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer menti oned hereinabove. As per the guidelines, the residential proof should be certifi ed by the respective Gaon Burah/Ward Member of the Gaon Panchayat and/or Secreta ry/President of the Gaon Panchayat of their local jurisdiction. Further case of the petitioner is that though the private respondents have submitted their certi ficates in proof of local residents, such certificates are being issued on appro ach being made without any cross verification. Thus, it is the grievance of the petitioners that if the authorities would have followed the aforesaid guidelines in a right earnest, the private respondent Nos. 8 and 9 could not have offered their candidatures and consequently would also not have been selected and appoin ted. Mr. Atia has further submitted that respondent No. 10 in WP(C) No. 6450/ 10. 2010 was serving as Assistant Teacher in the Kariyani ME Madrassa while she was selected and appointed as Anganwadi Worker inasmuch as, at the time of appointme nt as Anganwadi Worker which is barred as per terms and conditions of the guidel ines issued by social welfare department.

11. On the contrary, Mr. Barua, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) Nos. 1038 and 1045 of 2011 has vehemently submitted that the petitioners in thes e two writ petitions who have also been made respondent Nos. 8 and 9 in WP(C) No . 6450/2010 are local residents of the Anganwadi Centre in question. To that eff ect, they have also submitted certificates of local Gaonburah as stipulated in t he guidelines despite submitting their certificates issued by the proper authori ty. An Enquiry was made behind the back of the petitioners and despite the fact of submission of local residents certificates, the Enquiry Officer found that th e petitioners are not the local residents and the so called enquiry was made wit hout giving any notice to the petitioners. Moreso, the grievance of the petition ers is that the enquiry so made was with regard to the No. 23 Laskar Nagar Angan wadi Centre whereas the Centre for which the petitioner applied for is Laskarnag ar Chuburi Anganwadi Centre .

12. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. The rival co ntentions of the parties have been given due consideration by this Court. Howeve r, above being the disputed question of fact as to whether the petitioners/respo ndents belong to aforesaid Centre and or respondent No. 10 was serving as Assist ant Teacher on the date of appointment as Anganwadi Worker in the No. 23 Laskar Nagar Chuburi Anganwadi Centre, this Court in exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot make a roving enquiry and resolv e the same by taking recourse to thorough enquiry taking evidence etc. Hence, co nsidering the grievance raised, it would be appropriate to issue a direction to the Director of Social Welfare, Assam to look into the grievance of the petition ers by way of determining as to whether the writ petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 1038 /2011 and 1045/2011 and private respondent Nos. 8 and 9 in WP(C) No. 6450/2010 conforms to the requirement of residential status in terms of the relevant guide lines and/or whether on the date of appointment as Anganwadi Worker of private r espondent No. 10 in WP(C) No. 6450/2010 was serving as Assistant Teacher in Kari yani M.E. Madrassa School, Murajhar, District Nagaon as alleged.

13. Since the task involved will be essentially a finding of fact, the assis tance of the Deputy Commissioner of the districts will be necessary. Although, a s per the guidelines it is the jurisdictional Gaonburah/ward member of the Gaon Panchayat and/or the President/Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat who are to certi fy the related residential proof but in view of the allegations made in the writ petitions, such certificates are being issued without any cross verification, it would be appropriate for the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon to adopt such a dev ice as may be deemed fit and proper for getting the correct information from the said authorities or any other authority towards ascertaining the true state of affair relating to the residential status of the private respondents, i.e. whet her they conform to the requirement of being an inhabitant/resident of the area where the Anganwadi Centre is located. In view of the above, all the three writ petitions are disposed of with

14. the following directions: (i)The petitioners shall submit a representation before the Director, Social Wel fare, Assam within 04.12.2012 and the Director, Social Welfare shall examine the claim of the petitioners in consultation with the jurisdictional Deputy Commiss ioner, who in turn may make necessary verification etc. through the jurisdiction al Gaonburah/ ward member of the Gaon Panchayat and/or the President/Secretary o f the Gaon Panchayat. (ii) While carrying out the aforesaid exercise, the said authorities may also f ind out as to whether the petitioners in WP(C) Nos.1038/2011 and 1045/2011 confo rm to the requirement of being a resident of the same area where the Anganwadi C entre is located. (iii) In the event of any adverse finding relating to residential status of the writ petitioners in WP(C) Nos.1138 and 1045 of 2011 and private respondent No. 1 0 in WP(C) No. 6450/2010 found to be serving as Assistant teacher in Kariyani ME Madrassa School, on the date of her appointment as Anganwadi Worker they may be provided with reasonable opportunity of being heard before the adverse findings are translated into action by appropriate measures in accordance with law. (iv) The outcome of the entire exercise may be communicated to the parties invol ved forthwith. (v) While carrying out the exercise, the authority shall take into account the relevant guidelines including the amendments made therein towards determination of the residential status of the selected candidates i.e. the petitioners in WP( C) Nos. 1038 and 1045 of 2011. (vi)The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out/adopted as expeditiously as poss ible, but at any rate, not later than 18.01.2013.

15. The writ petitions, accordingly, stand disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

16. nsel, Social Welfare Department for doing the needful. Let a copy of this order be furnished to Mr. Singh, learned Standing Cou