Disposed

Smt.Chennamma S/O Siddappa Kenduer v. the Principal Secretary

Karnataka HC3 Sept 2019WP/112251/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, former Anganawadi workers, sought promotion to Supervisors citing a Ministry circular mandating 50% vacancies for eligible long-serving workers. The High Court directed the Deputy Director to consider the petitioners' eligibility list while filling supervisory posts.

What did the court decide?

The Deputy Director, Women and Child Development, Dharwad, is directed to consider the list of eligible petitioners (Annexure-C) while filling up posts of Supervisors.

Smt.Chennamma S/O Siddappa Kenduer Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶2

DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.112251/2019

¶7

& WRIT PETITION NOS.112868-880/2019 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT.CHENNAMMA D/O SIDDAPPA KENDUER, AGE:36 YEARS, OCC:AGANWADI WORKER, R/O RAIPUR I ANGANWADI CENTRE, DHARWAD, TQ & DT DHARWAD.

¶10

SMT. SUMANGALA D/O BASAVENNAPPA DODAMANI, AGE:39 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O DEVIKOPPA II CENTRE, KALAGHATAGI,

¶11

TQ:KALAGHATAGI, DIST:DHARWAD.

¶12

SMT. SHANKRAVVA D/O CHANNABASAPPA DHANIGONDA, AGE:39 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI, WORKER, R/O HUBLI-DHARWAD URBAN DORAGALLI II CENTRE DHARWAD, TQ & DT DHARWAD.

¶13

SMT.CHITRAKKA D/O FAKIREDDY IRADDI, AGE:39 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O TIRLAPUR CENTRE, NAVALAGUNDA, TQ:NAVALAGUNDA, DIST:DHARWAD.

¶14

SMT.FARIDA D/O HASSANSAB, AGE:36 YERS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER,

¶15

¶16

R/O URBAN BARAKOTRI, ANGANWADI CENTRE, DHARWAD, TQ & DT DHARWAD.

¶17

SMT.CHANNAKKA B ANGADI, AGE:47 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O TURMARI KOPPA CENTRE, TQ & DT:DHARWAD.

¶18

SMT. RENUKA D/O ASHOK CHALWADI, AGE:48 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O ALNAVAR A CIRCAL ALNAVAR NO.7, TQ:ALNAVAR, DIST:DHARWAD.

¶19

SMT. NIRMALA S BENNI, AGE:34 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O ALNAVAR CIRCLE NO.17 ALNAVAR, TQ:ALNAVAR, DIST:DHARWAD.

¶20

SMT. SHIVAKKA D/O CHANABASAPPA YALIWAL, AGE:44 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O YARIKOPPA, TQ & DT DHARWAD.

¶21

SMT SAROJA D/O SHANKARAYYA HAROGERI, AGE:49 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O TAVALAGERI, TQ:KALGHATAGI, DIST:DHARWAD.

¶22

SMT. SHASHIKAL C PATIL, AGE 46 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O NIGDI-2, TQ & DT DHARWAD.

¶23

SMT. AKKAVVA D/O MANAPPA PATAR, AGE:49 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O HATTIKOLLA-II, TQ & DT DHARWAD.

¶24

SMT. PRABHAVATHI D/O SANGAPPA KOWDI, AGE:52 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O

¶25

¶26

14.	SMT VIJAYA B S W/O GULAPPA GOLASANGI, AGE:48 YEARS, OCC:ANGANWADI WORKER, R/O NAVALUR, TQ & DIST:DHARWAD. ...PETITIONERS
(BY	SRI.RAJASHEKAR GUNJALLI , ADVOCATE)
AND	:
1.	THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT, VIDHANA SOUDA, BENGALURU 560 001.
2.	THE DIRECTOR, WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001.
3.	THE JOINT DIRECTOR, WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001.
4.	THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT, DHARWAD. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY	SRI.V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R4)

¶27

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 TO IMPLEMENT THE ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PROMOTE THE PETITIONERS TO THE POST OF SUPERVISORS.

¶28

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

¶30

ORDER

¶31

The petitioners who have been appointed as Anganawadi workers in Dharwad District assert that they have been working for the past more than 10 years.

¶32

The petitioners state that they are eligible to be considered for appointment as Supervisors. It is further submitted that the Government of India has issued a circular dated 15^th September, 2015 whereby 50% of vacancies in the posts of Supervisors are required to be filled up by promotion from amongst the Anganawadi workers who have ten years experience and have prescribed educational qualifications.

¶33

It is further submitted that the recruitment

¶34

would be in accordance with the recruitment rules to the posts of Supervisors. It is further submitted that pursuant to the said circular at Annexure-A, there was a direction by the Director, Women and Child Welfare Department to the Deputy Director calling upon the

¶35

¶36

Deputy Director to prepare a list of eligible Anganawadi workers which would be considered for promotion to fill up the post of Supervisors. It is submitted that pursuant to the communication at Annexure-B list has been prepared by respondent No.4-Deputy Director and it is stated that the same list has been sent to the concerned authorities for appropriate action. Hence, it is contended that appropriate direction be issued to the respondents to take necessary steps for filling up of the post of Supervisors taking note of the list at AnnexureC.

¶37

It is not in dispute that the list at Annexure-

¶38

C has been prepared. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the list has been prepared after taking note of the eligibility of the Anganawadi workers in accordance with the prevailing recruitment rules. In the light of the circular at Annexure-A the list that has been prepared by

¶39

¶40

respondent No.4 is to be considered for appropriate action.

¶41

Hence, it is directed that the respondent

¶42

No.2 when filling up of the posts of Supervisors in accordance with the recruitment rules would take note of the list at Annexure-C and take appropriate action, while filling up of the posts.

¶43

It is open to the petitioners to make

¶44

necessary representation seeking filling up of posts in accordance with the prevailing rules and while doing so to take note of the list at Annexure-C.

¶45

Accordingly, the petitions are disposed off subject to the above observations.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

Smt.Chennamma S/O Siddappa Kenduer v. the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Chennamma S/O Siddappa Kenduer v. the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok S/O Shambulingappa Kogile, Vs Geetha W/O Ashok Kogile

Danawwa W/O Irappa Nagaraddi Vs Ninganagouda S/O Budanagouda Patil

Satya Pramod Vs Satish S/O Pandurang Kulkarni

Dr. Satish R. Koujalagi Vs the Director

Gadigeppa S/O Tammanna Neginahal Vs the Commissioner

Prof.Maruti S/O Appayya Kadam Vs the State of Karnataka