Dismissed

Buli Begum v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Dec 2021WP(C)/5717/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the selection process for anganwadi workers when the petitioner was an anganwadi helper. The court held the petitioner was ineligible due to incomplete ten-year service and dismissed the claim of a violated legal right, noting she now qualifies for future recruitment.

What did the court decide?

Interim order vacated; writ petition disposed of; petitioner not eligible for current selection; future consideration permitted.

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

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010186012019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/5717/2019

¶5

BULI BEGUM

¶6

W/O SARIF UDDIN, R/O VILL. KAJIAMATI, P.O. MAINAMATI PATHAR, P.S. GOBARDHANA, DIST. BAKSA (ASSAM), PIN-781315

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, KOKRAJHAR

¶9

2:THE JOINT DIRECTOR SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT. BTC KOKRAJHAR ASSAM 3:THE CHAIRMAN PROJECT LEVEL SELECTION COMMITTEE GOBARDHANA ICDS PROJECT C/O CDPO GOBARDHANA ICDS PROJECT JYOTINAGAR SIMLAGURI DIST. BAKSA ASSAM

¶10

4:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER GOBARDHANA ICDS PROJECT JYOTINAGAR SIMLAGURI DIST. BAKSA ASSA

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G BAISHYA

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : SC. BTC

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 07-12-2021

¶17

Heard Mr. I Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T C Chutia, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent no. 1 being the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam and Mr. P Nayak, the learned counsel for the authorities in the Social Welfare Department of BTC.

¶18

The petitioner was appointed as an anganwadi helper in Kajiamati Anganwadi Centre No. 425 and she had joined her service as per the joining report dated 18.12.2009 which is annexed as Annexure-IV, page-19 to the writ petition. A selection process pursuant to an advertisement dated 21.06.2019 issued by the CDPO, Jyotinagar, Simaluguri in the Baksa district, amongst others, for the post of anganwadi worker in the Kajiamati Pathar No. 425 Anganwadi Centre, where the last date of submission of application form in the advertisement is provided to be 30.07.2019, is being held. According to the petitioner the selection process for direct recruitment to the post of an anganbadi worker would affect her right to be considered for promotion to the post of aganbandi worker.

¶19

This petition is instituted for setting aside the selection process made by the respondent authorities in respect of Kajiamati Pathar Anganwadi Centre No. 425 pursuant to the advertisement dated 21.06.2019.

¶20

The petitioner raises a claim that she being the anganwadi helper in the concerned Anganwadi Centre, a legal right flow in her favour for being considered for promotion and therefore, the selection made pursuant to the advertisement dated 21.06.2019 would violate her legal right.

¶21

Mr. T C Chutia, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate refers to the

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

guidelines for promotion to the post of anganwadi worker from anganwadi helper and submits that a qualifying service of ten years as anganwadi helper is necessary for promotion to the post of anganwadi worker. Mr. Chutia points out that the petitioner having joined in service on 18.12.2009 as per the joining report which is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, and the last date of submission of application form pursuant to the advertisement dated 21.06.2019 is 30.07.2019, the petitioner had not completed ten years of service as anganwadi helper on the last date of submission of application form. Accordingly, it is the submission that the petitioner was ineligible to be promoted on the last date of the application.

¶24

After perusal of the materials on records, we are satisfied with the contention raised by Mr. Chutia and is also of the view that as on 30.07.2019, the petitioner completed approximately slightly more than nine years seven months of service. Accordingly, as the petitioner was ineligible to participate in a process for promotion and therefore, we are of the view that no legal right of the petitioner as claimed for in this writ petition is violated. However, we take note that in the meantime the petitioner had completed ten years of service as an anganwadi helper and therefore, would now be eligible to participate in any process for appointment/promotion as anganwadi worker. If any further advertisement is issued and the petitioner is otherwise qualified, the respondent authorities shall also take the candidature of the petitioner into consideration if the petitioner intends to apply against any such future recruitment.

¶25

Interim order passed earlier stands vacated and the process for selection to be proceeded as per law.

¶26

Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Buli Begum v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Buli Begum 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chinmoy Das Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Amit Basumatari Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gagan Chaudhury and 2 Ors. Vs the Gauhati University and 6 Ors.

Shri Shah Jahangir Alom Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Anjali Sah Vs the Union of India and 11 Ors.

GO-2518M M.L Agarwal Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.