Smti Sakuntala Das Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF WOMAN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT, JANATA BHAWAN, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6, ASSAM

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR WOMAN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT UZANBAZAR GUWAHATI-1 KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

¶11

3:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER GOALPARA DISTRICT GOALPARA

¶12

4:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER MATIA INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MATIA GOALPAR

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A D CHOUDHURY,

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,

¶15

Page No.# 2/6

¶16

BEFORE

¶17

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER

¶18

09/12/2025

¶19

Heard Mr. A D Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶20

2. The petitioner in the present proceedings has presented a challenge to an advertisement dated 27.05.2025, whereby, applications were invited for engagement of Anganwadi Worker against various Anganwadi Centers under Matia Integrated Child Development Project, including the vacant post of Anganwadi Worker available at 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities for consideration of her case for promotion against the vacant posts of Anganwadi Worker available at 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center.

¶21

3. The petitioner, herein, was initially engaged as an Anganwadi Helper at 183 No. Dolgoma Collegepara Anganwadi Center, vide issuance of a communication dated 29.09.2007. Such engagement of the petitioner was preceded by a process of selection. The petitioner was, thereafter, vide issuance of an order dated 20.08.2021, transferred as an Anganwadi Helper to 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center and the petitioner is continuing to discharge her duties as an Anganwadi Helper in the said Anganwadi Center.

¶22

The respondent authorities had formulated Guidelines for promotion of Anganwadi Helpers to the post of Anganwadi Worker available in the Anganwadi Centers functioning within the same Revenue Village. The said Guidelines were notified vide Notification dated 04.03.2013. The Guideline in addition to prescribing the educational qualification and the length of service mandated to be fulfilled by a Anganwadi Worker, also prescribed that the Anganwadi Helper to be eligible for promotion was required to be not above 45 years of age at the time of consideration of her case for such promotion. The vacancy being available against the post of Anganwadi Worker in the Anganwadi Center, wherein, the petitioner is presently discharging her duties, the petitioner had approached the respondent authorities

¶23

Page No.# 3/6

¶24

praying for consideration of her case for promotion against the said post of Anganwadi Worker in terms of the Guidelines contained in the Notification dated 04.03.2013.

¶25

The case of the petitioner, herein, however, was not considered for such promotion, inasmuch as, at the relevant point of time, when the petitioner had made her such application, she had already crossed the upper age limit of 45 years prescribed for the purpose. The respondent authorities, thereafter, issued the advertisement dated 27.05.2025, inviting applications for filling up of posts of Anganwadi Worker/Anganwadi Helper available in various Anganwadi Centers functioning under the Matia Integrated Child Development Project, including the post of Anganwadi Worker lying vacant in 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center, i.e., the center, wherein, the petitioner is presently working as Anganwadi Helper.

¶26

The said process of direct recruitment having been initiated and the process being taken forward, the petitioner, herein, has instituted the present proceeding praying for reliefs, as noticed hereinabove.

¶27

4. It is to be noted that the last date fixed for submission of application in terms of the said advertisement dated 27.05.2025 was 06.06.2025. Thereafter, the competent authority had issued a communication scheduling the date of interview to be held in pursuance to the said advertisement dated 27.05.2025, on 18.06.2025. When the said developments had taken place, the Cabinet in its meeting held on 07.08.2025 had decided to increase the upper age limit of 45 years as prescribed in the provisions of the Notification dated 04.03.2013 for consideration of the cases of eligible Anganwadi Helpers to the post of Anganwadi Worker. The enhancement was made up to 50 years.

¶28

5. In pursuance to the said decision of the Cabinet, the respondent authorities issued a Notification dated 22.08.2025, therein, substituting the provisions of Clause-6 of the Notification dated 04.03.2013 to the following effect:

¶29

“6. The Anganwadi Helper to be eligible for promotion under this scheme shall not be above 50 years of age at the time of consideration of her case for promotion.”

¶30

Page No.# 4/6

¶31

6. A perusal of the Notification dated 22.08.2025 would bring to the forefront that the enhancement of the age limit prescribed for consideration of the cases of eligible Anganwadi Helpers to that of Anganwadi Workers to 50 years has been so made with prospective effect.

¶32

7. The petitioner in view of the said enhancement of the age limit as brought into effect vide Notification dated 22.08.2025 has staked a claim for consideration of her case for promotion against the vacant post of Anganwadi Worker available at 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center.

¶33

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

¶34

9. The facts, noticed hereinabove, are not in dispute and accordingly, are not reiterated.

¶35

10. The claim of the petitioner for being promoted to the vacant post of Anganwadi Worker, existing in 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center was not permissible to be considered at the time when she had so submitted her representation, inasmuch as, at the relevant point of time, the petitioner had already crossed the age of 45 years mandated for consideration for such promotion in terms of the provisions of Clause-6 of the Notification dated 04.03.2013.

¶36

11. As noticed hereinabove, the said post was put up for direct recruitment and on the last date fixed for submission of the applications, also it is to be noted that the petitioner was not eligible for being considered for promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker, inasmuch as, she had crossed the upper age limit. The said process of direct recruitment was thereafter taken forward and the selection was held in the matter, however, the process has not been taken to its logical conclusion.

¶37

12. The respondent authorities, thereafter, in pursuance to a Cabinet decision had issued the Notification dated 22.08.2025, substituting the provisions of Clause-6 of the Notification dated 04.03.2013 and thereby, enhancing the upper age limit for consideration of the case of a Anganwadi Helper for promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker up to 50 years.

¶38

13. The petitioner in pursuance to the Notification dated 22.08.2025 is found to be within

¶39

Page No.# 5/6

¶40

the age limit now prescribed for promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker. However, the post of Anganwadi Worker existing in 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center having already been put for direct recruitment vide issuance of the advertisement dated 27.05.2025, it would not be permissible for this Court to direct for consideration of the case of the petitioner, herein, against the said post of Anganwadi Worker.

¶41

14. Further, from the advertisement dated 27.05.2025, it is found that the said post is reserved for candidates belonging to the Schedule Caste Community. Although, the petitioner had raised an objection with regard to the reservation of the said post of Anganwadi Worker for Schedule Caste candidates on the ground that such reservation was so made by the authorities without receiving the opinion of the people of the area, who are covered by the Anganwadi Center, this Court would not be in a position to accept such contention, inasmuch as, the reservation of post is within the discretion of the respondent authorities and it has not been demonstrated in the present proceedings by the petitioner that the requisite parameters have not been complied with by the respondent authorities before proceeding to reserve the post of Anganwadi Worker available at 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center for Schedule Caste category candidates. Accordingly, the said contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner would not mandate any interference.

¶42

15. In view of the conclusions drawn by this Court, hereinabove, the claim of the petitioner for interference with the advertisement dated 27.05.2025, in so far as the post of Anganwadi Worker available at 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Center is concerned, would not mandate acceptance. Further, the prayer of the petitioner for a direction upon the respondent authorities for consideration of her case for promotion against the said post would, for the reasons cited above, also not mandate any interference.

¶43

16. After the issuance of the Notification dated 22.08.2025, raising the upper age limit to 50 years for consideration of the case of eligible Anganwadi Helpers for promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker, the petitioner, herein, having been found to be continuous in service for more than 10 (ten) years as an Anganwadi Helper and within the age of 50 years, it is provided that in the event any further vacant post of Anganwadi Worker rises in any Anganwadi Center situated within the same Revenue Village, wherein, the present Anganwadi

¶44

Page No.# 6/6

¶45

Center of the petitioner is situated, the case of the petitioner be considered by the respondent authorities in terms of the Guidelines as contained in the Notification dated 04.03.2013. The petitioner is also at liberty to approach the respondent authorities by way of submitting a representation for consideration of her case for such promotion in the event any further vacancy is available, other than the vacancy of Anganwadi Worker available at 137 No. Dolgoma Paulpara Anganwadi Centre, advertised vide advertisement dated 27.05.2025.

¶46

17. With the above observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶47

JUDGE

¶48

Comparing Assistant

Smti Sakuntala Das v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti Sakuntala Das v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V. Krishnendu Sinha Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Rajkumar Prithviraj Narayan Dev Mech @ Prithviraj Narayan Dev Mech Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Sadhani Terangpi Vs State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Abul Kalam Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Smti Ailota Kalita Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Brikendra Basumatary Vs Siddhartha Singh, IAS and Ors.