Disposed

Anita Sinha v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Mar 2021WP(C)/9/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenging promotion rejection in written test held for Anganwadi Workers alleging deviation from oral interview norms. Court held petitioner barred from questioning process after participation but directed State to follow original norms for future vacancies. Petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner cannot challenge the impugned order dated 02.05.2017; State must follow Notification dated 04.06.2012 norms for future vacancies.

Anita Sinha Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/6

¶2

GAHC010007662017

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/9/2018

¶5

ANITA SINHA D/O LT. LAL MOHON SINHA VILL AND P.O. DULALGRAM DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

¶8

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

¶9

SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006

¶10

3:THE DIRECTOR

¶11

SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT ASSAM UZANBAZAR P.O. GUWAHATI - 781001 ASSAM

¶12

4:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER NARSINGHPUR ICDS PROJECT P.O. NARSINGHPUR DIST- CACHAR ASSAM

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N DHAR

¶14

Page No.# 2/6

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 04-03-2021

¶19

Heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate for all the respondents.

¶20

The petitioner’s case in brief is that she has been working for the last 32 years as an Anganwadi Worker and she is an aspirant for upgradation to the post of Supervisor, against the 25% quota earmarked for experienced Anganwadi Workers. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the norms and guidelines regarding the selection process that has been formulated by the State Government vide Notification dated 04.06.2012, issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Social Welfare Department, only provides for giving of marks on the basis of Oral Interview. It does not provide for making the selection process by way of a written examination. He further submits that this Court in the earlier round of litigation, i.e. WP(C) 5175/2013, vide order dated 24.11.2015 had directed the Director of Social Welfare Department to consider promotion/upgradation of the petitioner from Anganwadi Worker to Supervisor in terms of the Government Notification dated 04.06.2012.

¶21

The petitioner’s counsel submits that subsequent to the order dated 24.11.2015 passed in WP(C) 5175/2013, the petitioner took part in the selection process held for promotion to the post of Supervisor and as the petitioner had secured only 18 marks in the written test, which was below the cut-off marks of 26 for OBC/MOBC candidates, the petitioner was not called for interview. He accordingly submits that the selection process held for promotion to the post of Supervisor where the petitioner took part in the written test

¶22

Page No.# 3/6

¶23

should be set aside as the norms and guidelines regarding the selection process as provided in the Notification dated 04.06.2012 was not followed. Consequently the speaking order dated 02.05.2017 passed by the Director of Social Welfare Department, wherein the petitioners’ prayer for promotion to the post of Supervisor was rejected should also be set aside.

¶24

Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel for the State respondents, on the other hand submits that pursuant to the order dated 24.11.2015 passed in WP(C) 5175/2013 and in terms of the Government Notification dated 04.06.2012, the Directorate of Social Welfare, Assam took steps for filling up 25% vacant posts of Supervisor from Anganwadi Workers. To make the selection process less cumbersome, a written test was held wherein twelve thousand eligible Anganwadi Workers participated in the selection process. The cut-off mark of 26 marks was stipulated as a condition for the selected candidates to appear for the interview, as otherwise, it would have been nigh impossible for the State respondents to make the selection by interview only, for twelve thousand candidates. He accordingly submits that there is no infirmity with the decision of the State respondents in conducting a written test to weed out candidates, prior to implementing the norms and guidelines regarding the selection process, as enumerated in the Government Notification dated 04.06.2012.

¶25

5. I have heard the counsels for the parties.

¶26

This Court vide order dated 24.11.2015 passed in WP(C) 5175/2013 had noted the averments made in the affidavit filed by the Director, Social Welfare Department, wherein it was categorically stated that the case of the petitioner would be considered for promotion/upgradation to the post of Supervisor in terms of the Government Notification dated 04.06.2012. The operative portion of the order dated 24.11.2015 is re-produced below:

¶27

“...................

¶28

It appears that the Social Welfare Department has issued the notification dated 04.06.2012 keeping in mind such laudable objective. Participation of the petitioner in the selection for

¶29

Page No.# 4/6

¶30

direct recruitment to the post of Supervisor cannot be a ground to debar consideration of her claim for upgradation under the 25% reserved quota for in-service Anganwadi Workers. As already noticed above, respondent No.4, junior to the petitioner, was upgraded way back in the year 2004. She has also expired in the meanwhile. In the impugned order dated 31.05.2013 as well as in the affidavit filed by the Director, it is categorically stated that case of the petitioner would be considered for promotion/upgradation to the post of Supervisor in terms of the Govt. notification dated 04.06.2012.

¶31

That being the position, Court is of the view that case of the petitioner for such promotion/upgradation is required to be considered without any further delay.

¶32

Accordingly, Director of Social Welfare, Assam is directed to consider promotion/upgradation of the petitioner from Anganwadi Worker to Supervisor in terms of the Govt. notification dated 04.06.2012 within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. While so considering the case of the petitioner, Director shall bear in mind the observations made above.

¶33

Writ petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above.”

¶34

The norms and guidelines regarding the selection process for promotion to the post of Supervisor against the 25% quota, from amongst Anganwadi Workers as per the Notification dated 04.06.2012 are as follows :

¶35

“ NORMS AND GUIDELINES REGARDING SELECTION PROCESS :

¶36

(1) The Selection shall be made on the basis of Oral Interview of 100 marks distributed as follows :

¶37

(i) For Educational Qualification ......................60 marks (Total)

¶38

(i-a) for candidates passed HSLC/HMLC in 1^st Div ...50 + 5 = 55 marks

¶39

(i-b) for candidates passed HSLC/HMLC in 2^nd Div ...40 + 3 = 43 marks

¶40

(i-c) for candidates passed HSLC/HMLC in 3^rd Div ...35 + 2 = 37 marks

¶41

a. (i) For length of service as AWW ......................... 10 marks

¶42

(a) For length of service above 10 years but below 15 years ... 6 marks

¶43

(b) For length of service above 15 years but below 20 years ... 8 marks

¶44

¶45

The proficiency in service shall be determined by the Selection Committee on the basis of

¶46

Page No.# 5/6

¶47

performance report of the concerned Anganwadi Worker, at least for last 3 (three) years to be submitted by the concerned CDPO.

¶48

(ii) For understanding of the problems of Women, Children and adolescent Girls etc. & Knowledge of Health care, Nutrition and learning needs of the beneficiaries ....... 10 marks

¶49

(iii) For proficiency in music, recitation and games and sports --- 10 marks.

¶50

(iv) Communication skills ...................................................... 10 marks.

¶51

A perusal of the operative portion of the order dated 24.11.2015 passed in WP(C) 5175/2013, read with the norms and guidelines regarding the selection process for promotion of Anganwadi Workers to Supervisor, shows that there is no provision for having a written test prior to selecting the Anganwadi Workers on the basis of an Oral Interview. In view of the above, the selection process should have been done strictly in terms of the Notification dated 04.06.2012 as had been directed by this Court.

¶52

However, the impugned order dated 02.05.2017 issued by the Director, Social Welfare Department shows that the petitioner had taken part in the selection process, for promotion to the post of Supervisor from Anganwadi Worker, by taking part in the written test. As the petitioner did not secure the cut-off marks required for being eligible for the interview, the petitioner was not called for the interview and hence could not be selected for promotion to the post of Supervisor. Though the State respondents were bound to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Supervisor in terms of the order dated 24.11.2015 passed in WP(C) 5175/2013 and the Notification dated 04.06.2012, the State respondents had the candidates undergo a written test. The petitioner took part in the written test and did not make any challenge to the said procedure prior to taking part in the selection process.

¶53

In the case of Ramesh Chandra Shah vs. Anil Joshi, reported in (2013) 11 SCC 309, the Apex Court has held that “a person who consciously takes part in the process of selection cannot thereafter, turn around and question the method of selection and it’s outcome”.

¶54

Page No.# 6/6

¶55

In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court, the petitioner cannot make a challenge to the selection process and the outcome in the written test. Consequently the petitioner cannot be allowed to make a challenge to the impugned order dated 02.05.2017 passed by the Director of Social Welfare Department.

¶56

The above being said, the fact remains that the order dated 24.11.2015 passed in WP(C) 5175/2013 and the norms and guidelines regarding the selection process for promotion of Anganwadi Workers to Supervisor in terms of the Notification dated 04.06.2012 is still holding the field till date.

¶57

In view of the above, in the event there are vacancies to the 25% quota post of Supervisor, which are to be filled up by the Anganwadi Workers, the State respondents would have to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Supervisor in terms of the order dated 24.11.2015 passed in WP(C) 5175/2013 and in terms of the norms and guidelines regarding selection process provided in the Notification dated 04.06.2012. As there is no change to the norms and guidelines regarding selection process, as provided in the Notification dated 04.06.2012, the State respondents cannot be allowed to have a written test prior to exercising the norms and guidelines provided in the Notification dated 04.06.2012 for promotion to the post of Supervisor.

¶58

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶59

JUDGE

¶60

Comparing Assistant

Anita Sinha v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anita Sinha v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Paul Vs Hemen Das, IAS

Pranab Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Md. Jamal Uddin Sikdar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Rajib Bura Gohain Vs the Honourable Gauhati High Court and 2 Ors.

Dinesh Barman Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Musstt. Keyarun Nessa Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.