High Court
Case Details
WP(C) 2528/2012 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. GOSWAMI Heard Mr. SK Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R Islam, le arned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6 and Mr. BK Sharma, learned Standing counsel, Social Welfare Department. In response to an advertisement dated 12.03.2007 issued by the Child Dev 2. elopment Project Officer, in short, CDPO, Chenga ICDS Project, inviting applicat ions for appointment as Anganwadi Workers (AWW) and Anganwadi Helpers (AWH) in r espect of the Anganwadi Centres (AWC) mentioned in the advertisement, the petiti oner submitted her candidature for the post of AWW in respect of Changbandha Bah ir Char AWC. The present writ petitioner was selected and appointed as AWW for Changb
Legal Reasoning
3. andha Bahir Char AWC. There is a requirement in the advertisement that the candidate must be 4. a resident of the centre area for which the application is submitted. Three writ petitioners, namely, Smti. Runa Ahmed, Majida Khatun and Monowara Khatun filed a writ petition before this Court, registered as WP(C) No. 1814/08, wherein the present writ petitioner was arrayed as respondent No. 6, challenging selection o f private respondents therein on the ground that they are not residents within t heir respective AWCs. It is relevant to note that petitioner No. 3 therein, Mono wara Khatun challenged the appointment of the petitioner, who was selected as AW W for Changbandha Bahir Char AWC. Monowara Khatun is arrayed in this proceeding as respondent No. 6. It is not very clear whose selection Majida Khatun had assa iled in the said writ petition from the present materials on record. Runa Ahmed challenged the selection of AWW for Ramharipara AWC. 5.
Legal Reasoning
Mr. SK Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that her name was wrongly reflected as Julekha Khatun in the said writ petition and actually her
Decision
name is Jeleka Bhanu. 6. The writ petition WP(C) No. 1814/2008 was disposed of by an order dated 10.12.2009 alongwith a large number of writ petitions with the following directi ons: (cid:28)Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and the materials on record, i am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice wi ll be met if a Committee (s) is/are constituted by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, in the Social Welfare Department to look into the grievan ces of the petitioners as reflected in the individual writ petitions. It is subm itted by the learned counsel for the parties that there will not be any occasion for the petitioners to file individual representation before the said Commissio ner and Secretary agitating their grievances and that the individual writ petiti on may be treated as the representation. Since it will not be possible on the part of the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam in the Social Welfare Department to take the task of scrutinisin g the grievances of the petitioners all by himself, it is hereby provided that h e may constitute appropriate committee (s) with such members as he may deem fit and proper. In this connection, he may take into account the aforesaid suggestio ns advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. As to the constitution of th e committee, the Commissioner & Secretary shall decide as the whether it should be only one Committee or Committees District-wise/Sub-Division-wise. As to who s hould be members thereof will also be a matter to be decided by the Commissioner & Secretary applying his sound discretion. It is advisable not to include depar tmental officers in the Committee(s) against whom there are allegations. It is a lso advisable to get the assistance of the Deputy Commissioner and the SDOs of t he Districts and Sub-Divisions respectively. In so far as the BTC area is concer ned, members from that area shall be inducted in the Committee(s). The Committee(s) to be constituted by the Commissioner & Secretary as aforesaid shall be so constituted as expeditiously as possible but not later than 31st Jan uary, 2010. Upon such constitution of the Committee(s), same shall be notified. The petitioners shall approach the said Committee(s) with their individual and a uthenticated writ petitions, which will be treated as their representations. As suggested by the learned counsel appearing for both the official and private res pondents, they may also submit their authenticated copies of the affidavits, whi ch have been filed in some of the writ petitions. Such authentications may be ma de by the parties themselves or their learned counsel. In case of any doubt rega rding authenticity, the Committee(s) will be at liberty to get the same verified through the learned State Counsel. Upon submission of the aforesaid documents, the Committee(s) as per its own moda lity find out the truth or otherwise of the grievances made in the writ petition s. After the aforesaid scrutiny is done, the Committee(s) shall answer all the c ases by appropriate and speaking orders. Depending upon the orders so passed, th e consequential action to be taken by the departmental authorities will follow. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the Committee(s) as expeditiously a s possible but at any rate not later than 4 (four) months from the date of const itution of the Committee(s). The Committee(s) will decide the issues involved as per the existing modality an d guidelines. The Committee(s) will make it clear that in case of furnishing any distorted version of the related state of affairs, the officers concerned shall be liable for disciplinary proceedings. It will be open for the selected and appointed candidates who are not parties to this proceeding to submit their documents through affidavits before the said Co It is not in dispute that Sub-Divisional Level Committees were establish mmittee(s) (cid:29). 7. ed pursuant to the order dated 10.12.2009. 8. Contending that without causing any enquiries through the Committee as d irected by this Court in its order dated 10.12.2009, selected candidates had bee n engaged, two out of three writ petitioners in WP(C) No. 1814/2008 including pr esent respondent No. 6 approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 1390/2010. The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 30.07.2010 as follows: (cid:28)Heard Mr. A Roshid, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Ms. P Chakraborty, learned Standing counsel, Social Welfare Department, Assam. The grievance of the petitioners is, in brief, thus: The petitioner No. 1, namel y. Smti Runa Ahmed, was an applicant for appointment in the post of Anganwadi Wo rker at Ramharipara Anganwadi, and the petitioner No. 2, namely, Monowara Khatun , was an applicant for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Worker at Changbandh a Bahirchak Anganwadi Centre, ICDS Project, Barpeta. The petitioners claim that the private respondents, i.e., respondent Nos. 5 and 6, namely, Smti Sahera Khat un and Smti Julekha Khatun respectively, who have been selected as Anganwadi Wor kers, do not belong to the place, where the Anganwadi Centre is located. As the dispute, raised by the petitioners, is substantially factual in nature, t his Court is of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the present case , respondent No. 2, namely, Director of Social Welfare, Government of Assam, sha ll look into the grievances of the petitioners and make enquiry in this regard a nd, in accordance with the findings of the inquiry, pass appropriate order(s). W hatever decision is reached, in this regard, by the respondent No. 2, on the pet itioners’ grievances, shall be communicated, in writing, to the petitioners and if the petitioners feel aggrieved by the decision(s), which may be reached, or t he order(s), which may be passed by the respondent No. 2, the petitioners shall remain at liberty to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissib le. The whole exercise, so directed, shall be completed within a period of two month s from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the respondent No. 2, name ly, Director of Social Welfare, Government of Assam. The petitioners may furnish to the respondent No. 2 a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition and annexure thereto. Furnish a copy of this order to the learned Standing Counsel, Social Welfare Dep artment. (cid:29) 9. By the said order dated 30.07.2010, the Director of Social Welfare, Gove rnment of Assam was to make an enquiry with regard to the contention advanced th Mr. Sarma submits that till date the Director of Social Welfare, Governm at the selected candidates did not fulfil the prescribed qualification as they d o not belong to the AWC in question. 10. ent of Assam has not completed the enquiry. 11. It appears that the Committee constituted in terms of the order dated 10 .12.2009 of this Court made a recommendation on 26.08.2010 holding that the pres ent petitioner, who had been engaged as AWW for Changbandha Bahir Char AWC is no t a resident of Changbandha village and therefore, not eligible for appointment as AWW. 12. In terms of the order dated 10.12.2009 of this Court in WP(C) No. 1814/2 008 and the other batch of writ petitions, consequent upon the recommendation ma de by the Committee, consequential actions were to be taken by the Government. 13. On 02.07.2011, the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Social We lfare Department issued a letter to the respective Child Development Project Off icers enclosing thereto the action taken report based on the said recommendation of the Committee. So far as Chenga ICDS Project, which covers the subject matte r of AWC of this writ petition, against WP(C) No. 1814/2008, name of Runa Ahmed was reflected and it was noted that as the Committee had recommended cancellati on of engagement in respect of the present petitioner, therefore, a fresh interv iew is recommended. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the decision ta 14. ken by the government on the basis of recommendation made by the Committee shows total non application of mind. He submits that Runa Ahmed at no point of time c hallenged the engagement of the petitioner. She had challenged the engagement of one Sahera Khatun who was engaged as AWW of Ramharipara AWC and the Committee i n its order dated 26.08.2010 had recommended cancellation of engagement of Saher a Khatun. It is also submitted by him that even the writ petition number is wron gly reflected as WP(C) No. 1814/2007. However, as her name has been mentioned an d a fresh interview has been directed to be called, the petitioner has approache d this Court. No doubt, the Committee had made recommendation for cancellation o f the engagement of the petitioner, he submits. 15. It is also submitted by him that as two of the writ petitioners in WP(C) No. 1814/2008 including the present respondent No. 6 had once again moved this Court in WP(C) No. 1390/2010, in view of the directions contained therein, it is obligatory for the Director of Social Welfare Department, a higher authority than the Committee, to enquire into the allegations against the petitioner and w ithout there being any such enquiry, the respondent authorities cannot take any action towards advertisement of the post in question held by the petitioner. 16. Mr. R Islam, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6 does not dis pute that WP(C) No. 1390/2010 was filed by Monowara Khatun, whom he represents, alongwith Runa Ahmed, who were also writ petitioner in WP(C) No. 1814/2008. 17. y the Committee, the recommendation of the Committee should be acted upon. 18. Mr. BK Sharma, learned Standing counsel, Social Welfare Department submi ts that in view of subsequent order of this Court dated 10.07.2010, though the e nquiry has not been completed till now, the Director of Social Welfare Departmen t will be required to complete the enquiry and to take consequential actions on the basis of such enquiry. 19. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have considered the It is submitted by him that, as in the meantime, enquiry was conducted b materials on record. 20. Though there was an earlier direction on 10.12.2009 of this Court to go into the question of correctness or otherwise of the selection of the writ petit ioner and some others in WP(C) No. 1814/2008, by a Committee constituted for the purpose, two of the petitioners of WP(C) No. 1814/2008 had again approached thi s Court wherein direction was issued on 30.07.2010 directing the Director of Soc ial Welfare Department to make an enquiry with regard to the selection of the pr esent writ petitioner and one Sahera Khatun. It is also to be noted that the Com mittee had made recommendation on 26.08.2010, i.e., after direction was issued o n 30.07.2010 in WP(C) No. 1390/2010 to the Director of Social Welfare to make en quiry. 21. It is also not very clear from the enclosure to the letter dated 02.07.2 011 as to whether recommendation against the petitioner was actually accepted by the State Government. As the case of Runa Ahmed was considered, there could not have been any occasion for cancellation of the appointment of the present writ petitioner as Runa Ahmed had assailed the candidature of one Sahera Khatun. 22. In view of the attending facts and circumstances of this Court, I am of the considered opinion that the Director of Social Welfare will now complete the exercise as directed by this Court in the order dated 30.07.2010 in WP(C) No.13 19/2010. It will be completed within a period of 2 (two) months from today. It w ill be the personal responsibility of the Director of Social Welfare to see to i t that this order is complied with. It is also noted that without their being any explanation, for three lon 23. g years, direction of this Court has not been attended to. It is hoped that such inaction will not be repeated. Before this exercise is completed, the post of AWW in Changbandha Bahir 24. Char AWC shall not be advertised. 25. Writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above. No cost.