Smt. Anu Das vs The State Of Assam & Ors.

Heard Ms. M.D. Chowdhury, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Dhar, Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the Respondents.

The petitioner by way of instituting the present writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs;

As projected in the writ petition, the petitioner was appointed as an Anganwadi Worker at Atigaon Anganwadi Centre under Kathiatoli, ICDS project, vide an order dated 25.01.1996. In pursuance to a decision arrived at for reserving 25% posts in the cadre of Supervisor, for promotion from amongst Anganwadi Workers, vide communication dated 08.08.2014, the Director of Social Welfare Assam, required the District Social Welfare Officers of all Districts except BTAD, Karbi Anglong and NC Hills, to collect the particulars of HSLC passed Anganwadi Workers, who had completed 10 (ten) years of continuous service in such capacity as on 01.01.2014. Further, a District Level Committee was also constituted for conducting a written examination for recruitment against the said posts. The petitioner projects that in pursuance to the said communication dated 08.08.2014, the petitioner had submitted her application for recruitment against the post of Supervisor. The petitioner accordingly, was permitted to appear in the selection process which consisted of a written examination as well as a viva voce.

It is projected that the petitioner during the time of the said recruitment process initiated for promotion to the post of Supervisor had completed around 22 (twenty two) years of service and had also undergone various trainings as offered by the respondent authorities. The petitioner was under the legitimate expectation that she would be selected for promotion to the post of Supervisor, however, it is found that the case of the petitioner was ignored and persons junior to her working in the same ICDS project, were selected for promotion to the said post of Supervisor.

Being aggrieved, the petitioner had instituted the present writ petition.

Ms. M.D. Chowdhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner had performed well both in the written examination as well as in the viva voce test held, thereafter. Ms. Chowdhury, submits that the petitioner had all the requisite qualifications for being recruited to the post of Anganwadi Worker. She submits that in terms of the communication dated 08.08.2014, the Selection Committee so constituted, therein, ought to have considered the long experience of the petitioner, while finalizing the list of candidate for promotion to the post of Supervisor. She submits that in the affidavit filed by the Respondent Authorities, it has been projected that the petitioner in the written examination had secured for 41 marks and had scored 8.66 marks in the viva voce test. Accordingly, the petitioner was projected to have scored 49.66 marks in the said selection process. She submits that it was further projected that the cut-off marks for inclusion in the select list, in respect of Scheduled Caste (SC) category candidates, was 50.33. Ms. Chowdhury, submits that in the communication dated 08.08.2024, there is no prescription of obtaining any cut-off marks in the selection process and accordingly, the introduction of the cut-off marks after the selection process was so initiated, reveal a change in the Rules of the game after the game had begun, which was clearly impermissible.

Ms. M.D. Chowdhury, by referring to a earlier notification dated 04.06.2012, has submitted that in terms of the said notification the selection process did not contemplate a written examination and the selection was to be made on the basis of an oral interview and by granting marks to the Anganwadi Workers basing on the length of service rendered by them. She submits that a process contrary to the guidelines as introduced vide the notification dated 04.06.2012, was followed for the recruitment, in question, which was initiated vide the communication dated 08.08.2014.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that had the guidelines laid down in the notification dated 04.06.2012, been followed, the petitioner would have secured a place in the select list more so, considering the fact that she belonged to the SC community. She further projects that the respondents while preparing the select list for promotion to the cadre of Supervisor, had not followed the reservation roster.

In the above premises, Ms. M.D. Chowdhury, submits that the selection exercise as undertaken, in pursuance to the communication dated 08.08.2014, for promotion to the post of Supervisor, would mandate an interference from this Court.

Per contra, Mr. R. Dhar, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents, has submitted that in pursuance to the initiation of the process of recruitment, for promotion against 25% posts in the cadre of Supervisor from amongst Anganwadi Workers, around 12,000 (twelve thousand) eligible Anganwadi Workers, had participated in the selection process. He submits that the select list in pursuance to the said selection process was so prepared basing on the marks obtained by the candidates in the said selection. It is further projected that the results of the viva voce was declared in the official website of the Department on 02.02.2016.

Mr. R. Dhar, submits that the petitioner in the said selection process, had secured 41 marks in the written examination and 8.66 marks in the viva voce, totalling of 49.66 marks. Basing on the marks secured by the petitioner she was placed at Serial No.891 on merits. It is further projected that a select list of 284 (two hundred eighty four) candidates came to be prepared and the selected candidates were promoted. Mr. Dhar, further submits that the select list was prepared by also reckoning the provisions of reservation. Mr. Dhar, has further stated that 284 (two hundred eighty four) candidates being promoted in pursuance to the said selection process, was to the knowledge of the petitioner, which is apparent from the pleadings brought on record in the present proceedings by the petitioner, however, she had not proceeded to implead the selected candidates and/or any of them in a representative capacity in the present writ petition. He accordingly, submits that in the event the petitioner’s claim in the present writ petition is to be accepted, the same would be only an academic exercise, inasmuch as, it would not be permissible for this Court to direct for the appointment of the petitioner, as no vacant post is available from the said recruitment exercise. He further submits that an interference with the appointment of the selected candidates, would also not be called for as they have not been arrayed as a respondents in the present writ petition.

Having made the said submission, Mr. R. Dhar, has submitted that vide a notification dated 20.02.2024, in supersession of all earlier notifications, the guidelines for selection of candidates for recruitment against 25% of the cadre strength of the cadre of Supervisor, from amongst the in-service Anganwadi Workers, in General Districts, have already been notified. He submits that the said guidelines mandate that a in-service Anganwadi Worker, st completing 10 (ten) years of continuous service as on the 1 of January of the year in which the advertisement was issued, and who processes the required requisite educational qualifications, for direct recruitment to the post of Supervisor i.e. a Graduate Degree in Arts/Science/Homo/Allied Disciplines, from a University recognised by the Government of Assam, would only be eligible to apply. He further submits that in terms of the said guidelines, Anganwadi Workers who have not attained the age of 60 (sixty) years, are also made eligible for the purpose of the said recruitment. Mr. Dhar, submits that the said guidelines mandates holding of a State Level Written Examination(MCQ) of total 80 marks consisting of questions on Nutrition, Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE), General Awareness and General English, which would be conducted by the Director, for short listing of candidates based on merit, with due consideration of vacancy under each category. He further submits that a Computer Proficiency Test of 20 (twenty) marks is also prescribed to be held amongst the candidates short listed, and thereafter a select list equal to the number of vacancies available under each category, would be published.

Mr. R. Dhar, has submitted that although the said guidelines were so notified on 20.02.2024, the selection process had not been undertaken, only on account of the fact that the process for identifying an agency for conducting the examination was underway. Mr. Dhar, submits that the said recruitment process would however, be initiated at the earliest. Mr. Dhar, further submits that, in the event, the petitioner fulfils the eligibility criteria set out in the said notification dated 20.02.2024, she would be eligible to apply for promotion to the post of Supervisor, on an advertisement for the same being issued by the Director of Child & Women Development, Assam.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

While it is not disputed that the petitioner, at the time of the recruitment process initiated for selecting eligible Anganwadi Workers for promotion against 25% posts reserved in the cadre of Supervisor, had completed around 22 (twenty) years of service. However, what is to be noted is that the said promotion is to be so effected after a process of selection. A perusal of the communication dated 08.08.2014, issued by the then Director of Social Welfare Assam, initiating the process of recruitment from amongst eligible Anganwadi Workers for promotion against 25% posts reserved in the cadre of supervisor, for being filled up by way of promotion from Anganwadi Workers, reveals that the said selection process was to consist of the written examination and a viva voce. The said communication dated 08.08.2014, and the proposal as submitted thereto, by the then Director of Social Welfare Assam, was approved by the Government of Assam, vide a communication dated 30.09.2014.

The petitioner had applied in pursuance to the advertisement issued in this connection and she is on being found to be eligible, for appearing in the said selection process, was issued with an admit card for appearing in the written examination. The petitioner is found to have appeared in the written examination and thereafter in the viva voce examination without any objection. The petitioner in the present writ petition has projected that it ought to have been the guidelines notified by the notification dated 04.06.2012, that was required to be applied for the purpose of the said recruitment.

This Court from the materials brought on record finds that although the said guidelines as notified by the notification dated 04.06.2012, was found to be existing, the Government having approved the proposal submitted by the then Director Social Welfare, Assam, laying down, therein, the procedure for the said recruitment and such procedure contemplating only a written examination and a viva voce test, the petitioner without any objection having appeared in the said selection process, the pleas raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition, of the recruitment being vitiated, on the ground that the same was so conducted in violation of the guidelines notified vide the notification dated 04.06.2012, in the considered view of this Court, would not mandate an acceptance.

As noticed, hereinabove, the selection was to consist of a written examination followed by viva voce. The petitioner in the written examination, had secured 41 marks while in the viva voce examination she had secured 8.66 marks. The petitioner in the said selection process in total had scored 49.66 marks and was placed at serial no.891 on merit. 284 (two hundred eighty four) numbers of posts of Supervisor is found to have been filled up by way of promotion, in pursuance to the said recruitment exercise. The petitioner being placed at serial no.891 on merits, in the considered view of this Court, was not within the zone of consideration mandated for promotion against the 284 (two hundred eighty four) numbers of posts of Supervisor, which were put up for recruitment by way of promotion from amongst the Anganwadi Workers. The said recruitment being in pursuance to a selection, it is but natural that the placement of candidates in the list, on merits, would be on the basis of the marks obtained by them in the selection process and it is possible that juniors in the cadre of Anganwadi workers may scored more marks than their senior in the said cadre and accordingly, would be placed at higher position on merits. The claim of the petitioner that she was superseded in the matter of promotion to the cadre of Supervisor by her juniors in the cadre of Anganwadi Workers, would not mandate an acceptance, inasmuch as, such supersession was found to have occasioned in view of the higher marks scored by the juniors of the petitioner, herein.

The learned counsel for the petitioner had further projected that the respondents in their affidavit had contended that the petitioner having scored 49.66 marks in total during the selection process, she did not obtain the cut off marks, which was fixed as 50.33 for candidates belonging to SC community, for promotion to the said cadre of Supervisor. It is projected that the cut-off marks were introduced after the completion of the selection process.

This Court on an appreciation of the said contention, in the light of the materials brought on record, has found that the projection with regard to the cut-off marks is not for the purpose of determining the eligibility of a candidate appearing in the selection process to move to the next stage of the selection process and/or to be included in the select list, but the said cut-off marks is nothing but the marks obtained by the last candidate in the respective categories i.e. general as well as reserved category, who was included in the select list. Accordingly, the projections made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the present matter of introduction of a cut off marks after the selection process was so initiated does not appeal to this Court. Accordingly, the said contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner stands rejected.

Having drawn the said conclusions, this Court in the present proceedings finds that while the petitioner had prayed for a promotion to the cadre of Supervisor and had also made statements of juniors superseding her in the matter of such promotion, the petitioner is not found to have impleaded in the present writ petition, the selected candidates and/or any of them even in a representative capacity. The respondents have also projected in their affidavit that all the 284 (two hundred eighty four) numbers of posts of Supervisors put up for recruitments, were filled up in pursuance to the said recruitment exercise. The petitioner further had not projected in the present proceedings that there were further vacant posts of Supervisors available within the 25% quota mandated to be filled up by promotion from the cadre of Anganwadi Worker and she was within the merit position for the said promotion. Accordingly, in the absence of the selected candidates, their selection and appointments against the posts in the cadre of Supervisor would not be permissible to be interfered with by this Court. Accordingly, even if, the contentions of the petitioner is to accepted by this Court, it would still not be permissible for this Court to direct for the appointment of the petitioner.

This Court at this stage would consider the subsequent notification dated 20.02.2024, issued by the Respondent Authorities, laying down fresh guidelines for selection of candidate for promotion to the post of Supervisor against 25% quota reserved, therein, to be filled up from amongst, in-service Anganwadi Workers. It is found by this Court that although the said guidelines were duly notified on 20.02.2024, the recruitment process in pursuance, thereof, has not been initiated.

The learned counsel for the respondents on instructions has submitted that said guidelines having required, the Director to also conduct the written examination, as well as a Computer Proficiency Test, and it being permissible to entrust the said process to one or more external Government Agencies, the process of identifying an appropriate Agency in this connection was under way and the moment the said Agency is so identified, the recruitment process would be initiated. The guidelines as notified vide the notification dated 20.02.2024, has also stipulated that Anganwadi Workers, who have not attained the age of 60 (sixty) years, shall also be eligible to participate in the recruitment exercise.

The learned counsel for the petitioner having submitted that there are large number of vacancies available in the cadre of Supervisor within the 25 % quota mandated to be filled up by way of promotion from in-service Anganwadi Workers, this Court is of the considered view that a delay occasioning in initiating the said selection process has caused prejudiced to both to the petitioner and other similarly situated eligible in-service Anganwadi Workers.

Accordingly, this Court requires the Director to expeditiously, initiate a process of recruitment in terms of the guidelines notified vide the notification dated 20.02.2024, and/or any other subsequent notification issued in this connection, so as to also afford an opportunity to the petitioner for having her case considered for promotion to the cadre of Anganwadi Worker.

In view of the above conclusions drawn by this Court, this Court does not find any error in the selection and promotion of the Anganwadi Workers to the post of Supervisor, under challenge, in the present writ petition and accordingly, subject to the observations made with regard to the non-holding of the recruitment exercise in pursuance to the issuance of the notification dated 20.02.2024, the present writ petition is found to be devoid of any merit and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.