Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt.Shashikala Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 3 December, 2013
W.P. No. 3673/2012
3.12.2013
Shri M.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Vandana Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for respondent State
of M.P. Shri Shiv Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for respondent No. 4.
With consent of learned counsel for the parties, petition is finally heard.
With 42 marks in selection for the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta, Anganwadi Centre, Belbakurmiyan, Integrated Child Development Project Gangev, Rewa, petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Karyakarta by order dated 15.4.2010.
Respondent No. 4 who was awarded 36 marks, questioned the appointment of the petitioner on the ground that the experience gained by her as Teacher/Didi in Shishu Shiksha Kendra was not given the weightage.
The appeal preferred by respondent No. 4 was allowed by Collector, Rewa by order dated 25.10.2011, holding that she has been deprived of weightage in lieu of the experience as teacher in Shishu Shiksha Kendra. The reasons find mention in paragraph 7 of the Appellate Order:
7- izLrqr vihy esa eq[; iz'u ;g gS fd vihykfFkZ;k dks vuqHko ds vad fn;s tkus ;ksX; gS ;k ugha gS \ ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh ,dhd`r cky fodkl xaxso dh ewy uLrh esa i`"B dzekad 23 ls 41 rd vihykfFkZ;k ds vkosnu i= ,oa vU; nLrkost layXu fd;s x;s gSA vihykfFkZ;k }kjk vkosnu i= ds dqy uEcj 10 ¼v½ vkaxuokM+h dsUnz dk dzekad ,oa uke@dk;ZLFky dk uke& esa mYysf[kr fd;k gS fd f'k'kq f'k{kk dsUnz csyok dqfeZ;ku f'kf{kdk in rFkk dkye 10 ¼c½ vkaxuokM+h dsUnz ij dk;Z djus dh vof/k& 06 o"kZ 04 ekg mfYyf[kr fd;k x;k gSA rFkk i`"B dzekad 35 ij dk;kZy; tuin f'k{kk dsUnz xaxso }kjk dzekad 94 fnukad 04-08-2004 ls tkjh fd;k x;k vuqHko izek.k i= dh Nk;kizfr izekf.kr izfr i`"B dzekad 36 ij efgyk i<uk&i<kuk vkanksyu izek.k i= i`"B dzekad 37 ij iz/kkuk/;kid turk fo|k eafnj gnhZ [kqnZ ubZx<h ftyk jhok] }kjk tkjh izek.k i= i`"B dzekad 38 ls 41 rd ftyk f'k{kk ,oa izf'k{k.k laLFkku jhok ls izkIr izek.k i= dh Nk;kizfr izekf.kr djkrs gq, izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA ch-vkj-lh- xaxso }kjk tkjh izek.k i= dzekad 94 fnukad 04-08-2004 cgqr Li"V gS ftlesa crk;k x;k gS fd dqlqedyh iVsy }kjk fodkl [k.M vUrxZr lapkfyr f'k'kq f'k{kk dsUnz csyok dqfeZ;ku esa f'kf{kdk ds in ij fnukad 27-11-96 ls 31-03-2003 rd dk;Z fd;kA vihykfFkZ;k }kjk vihy ds lkFk bl izek.k i= dh ewy izfr Hkh is'k dh xbZA vr% bl ij 'kadk dh dksbZ xqatkb'k ugha jg tkrhA vkSj bl vk/kkj ij mls vf/kdre 10 vadksa dh ik=rk Fkh] tks fd ugha fn;s x;sA vihykfFkZ;k ds vuqHko ds 10 vad fn;s tkus ls mlds dqy vad 46 gks tkrs gS tks jsLik0 dzekad ,d ds 42 vad ls vf/kd gSA vr% vihy Lohdkj dh tkdj jsLik0 dzekad ,d dh fu;qfDr fujLr dh tkrh gS o vihykfFkZ;k dh fu;qfDRk dh tkrh gSA Consequently, while setting aside the appointment of petitioner respondent No. 4 was directed to be appointed as Anganwadi Karyakarta, Anganwadi Centre, Belbakurmiyan.
An appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 25.10.2011 was dismissed by the Commissioner, Rewa Division Rewa, vide his order dated 30.2.2012.
The order is being challenged on the ground that the Authorities grossly erred in taking into consideration the experience gained by respondent No. 4 as Teacher in Shishu Shiksha Kendra. It is urged that the experience which was to be taken into consideration was working as Didi and not the teacher. It is contended that even the petitioner was deprived of weightage in lieu of her having post graduate degree in M.Sc. (Biology).
The respondent No. 4 own her turn supports the orders passed by the Authorities concerned. It is contended that except the difference of nomenclature, i.e., "Shikshika" in place of "Didi", there was no difference in respect of the appointment and discharge of duties in Shishu Shiksha Kendra and since she had an experience from 27.11.1996 to 31.3.2003 as 'Shikshika' in Shishu Shiksha Kendra Belwakurmiyan, she was wrongly deprived of the weightage of marks in lieu thereof, which was rightly given in appeal. It is further contended that the petitioner did not question the alleged non grant of weightage in lieu of Post Graduate Degree, therefore, she cannot raise any grievance thereagainst. It is, however, contended that even the State Government later on vide circular dated 27.7.2007 deleted content No. 7 of clause 2 (A) of the circular dated 10.7.2007; therefore, the petitioner was rightly not granted the weightage in lieu of post graduate degree.
Considered the rival submissions.
Circular which governs the appointment of Anganwadi Karyakarta/Sahayika is F32/06/502 dated 10.7.2007, brought on record as Annexure P/1. Clause 2 of circular lays down the parameters for selection. It stipulates v-2- vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZvksa ds fu;qfDRk ds ekin.M ¼;ksX;rk lwph½ p;u lfefr }kjk vkaxuokM+h dsUnzokj ;ksX;rk lwph ¼eSfjV fyLV½ rS;kj dh tk;sxhA esfjV lwph rS;kj djus gsrq vf/kdre 100 vad fuEukuqlkj fn;s tk;saxs & v &2 ¼v½ 'kgjh ,oa lkekU; xzkeh.k {ks= & 1- vuq0tkfr@vuq0tutkfr dh efgyk ds fy, 5 vad] 2- xjhch js[kk ds uhps jgus okys ifjokj dh efgyk ds fy, 10 vad] 3- fo/kok@ifjR;drk@rykd 'kqnk@30 o"kZ ls vf/kd vk;q dh vfookfgr efgyk ds fy, 10 vad 4- vkaxuokM+h dsUnzksa dh lgkf;dk@feuh vkaxuokM+h dsUnzksa dh dk;ZdrkZ@f'k'kq f'k{kk dsUnz dh nhfn;ksa@'kgjh fodkl vfHkdj.k }kjk lapkfyr ckyokfM;ksa dh f'kf{kdk@iwoZ esa 'kgjh {ks= esa lapkfyr iks"k.k vkgkj dsUnzksa ij dk;Zjr iks"k.k vkgkj laxfBdkvksa@iwoZ esa vU; LFkku ij dk;Zrj vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ ds :i esa 5 o"kZ dk;Z dk vuqHko A ¼mDr ykHk dsoy mUgh vkosfndkvksa dks fn;k tkosxk ftUgsa f'kdk;r ds vk/kkj ij gVk;k u x;k gksa ½ & 10 vad] 5- gk;j lsds.Mjh esa 40 izfr'kr rd 20 vad ,oa 40 izfr'kr ls vf/kd vad ij izR;sd 2 izfr'kr ij 1 vad] 6- Lukrd gksus ij 10 vad] 7- LukdksRrj gksus ij 5 vad v &2 ¼c½ vkfnoklh {ks= 1- vuq0tkfr@vuq0tutkfr dh efgyk ds fy, 5 vad] 2- xjhch js[kk ds uhps jgus okys ifjokj dh efgyk ds fy, 10 vad] 3- fo/kok@ifjR;drk@rykd 'kqnk@30 o"kZ ls vf/kd vk;q dh fookfgr efgyk ds fy, 10 vad] 4- vkaxuokM+h dsUnzksa dh lgkf;dk@feuh vkaxuokM+h dsUnzksa dh dk;ZdrkZ@f'k'kq f'k{kk dsUnz dh nhfn;ksa@'kgjh fodkl vfHkdj.k }kjk lapkfyr ckyokfM;ksa dh f'kf{kdk@iwoZ esa 'kgjh {ks= esa lapkfyr iks"k.k vkgkj dsUnzksa ij dk;Zjr iks"k.k vkgkj laxfBdkvksa@iwoZ esa vU; LFkku ij dk;Zrj vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ ds :i esa 5 o"kZ dk;Z dk vuqHko A ¼mDr ykHk dsoy mUgh vkosfndkvksa dks fn;k tkosxk ftUgsa f'kdk;r ds vk/kkj ij gVk;k u x;k gksa ½ & 10 vad] 5- vkBoh esa 40 izfr'kr rd 20 vad ,oa 40 izfr'kr ls vf/kd vad ij izR;sd 2 izfr'kr ij 1 vad] 6- gk;j lsdsUMjh rd mRrh.kZ gksus ij 10 vad] 7- Lukrd gksus ij 5 vad fo'ks " k & nks ;k nks ls vf/kd vkosndksa ds leku vaad izkIr gksus ij vf/kd vk;q fd efgyk dks p;u esa izkFkfedrk nh tkosxhA That, on 27.7.2007 certain amendments were effected in the circular dated 10.7.2007. The circular is brought on record as Annexure R4/5 which is in the following terms:
e/; izns'k 'kklu efgyk ,oa cky fodkl foHkkx ea=ky; oYyHk Hkou Hkksiky @@ la'kks/ku @@ Hkksiky] fnukad 27-07-2007 dzekad ,Q 3&2@2006@50&2%& jkT; 'kklu bl foHkkx }kjk tkjh lela[;d vkns'k fnukad 10-07-2007 ls vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZvksa ,oa lgkf;dkvksa ds p;u ,oa fu;qfDr ds tkjh la'kksf/kr funsZ'kksa esa vkaxuokM+h dk;ZdrkZ dh fu;qfDRk gsrq vfuok;Z vgZrk,a 3 ¼'kS{kf.kd ;ksX;rk½ ^^vkfnoklh {ks=ksa esa efgyk vH;FkhZ vfuok;Zr% U;wure 8oha d{kk mRrh.kZ gksuk pkfg,^^ ds uhps uksV esa ^^vkfnoklh {ks= esa 8oha mRrh.k mlh fLFkfr esa ekU; gksxk tcfd 10 oha vFkok 12 oha mRrh.kZ efgyk vH;FkhZ miyC/k u gks i<+k tkosaA mDr tkjh vkns'k esa 2 ¼v½ 'kgjh ,oa lkekU; xzkeh.k {ks= dh dafMdk ¼5½ esa gk;j lsd.Mjh esa 40 izfr'kr rd 20 vad ,oa 40 izfr'kr ls vf/kd vad ij izfr
2 izfr'kr ij 1 vad ds LFkku ij gk;j lsd.Mjh esa 40 izfr'kr rd 25 vad ,oa 40 izfr'kr ls vf/kd vad ij izfr 2 izfr'kr 1 vad i<+k tk;A dafMdk& 7 LukdksRrj gksus ij 5 vad foyksfir le>k tkosA e/; izns'k ds jkT;iky ds uke ls rFkk vkns'kkuqlkj ¼jes'k rksykuh½ voj lfpo e/; izns'k 'kklu efgyk ,oa cky fodkl foHkkx Apparent it is from the circular dated 10.7.2007 and 27.7.2007 that 10 weightage marks is given in lieu of 5 years experience as Didi in Shishu Shiksha Kendra and that the weightage of 5 marks in lieu of post graduate Degree which was provided vide circular dated 10.7.007 was deleted by letter circular dated 27.7.2007. The selection since is of the year 2010, the amendment in clause 2 v 2 ( v ) 7 was very much relevant. This leads to an inevitable conclusion that there was no illegality committed by the selection committee in not extending 5 marks in lieu of her post graduate degree.
Regarding allotting 10 marks to respondent No. 4 in lieu of her having experience as 'Shikshika' in Shishu Shiksha Kendra from 27.11.1996 to 31.3.2003, in absence of any cogent material to establish that 'Didi' and 'Shikshika' in Shishu Shiksha Kendra are two different post/assignment, the conclusion arrived at by the Authorities in granting the weightage in lieu thereof cannot be faulted with.
Having thus considered, this Court does not perceive any illegality, perversity with the impugned order.
Consequently, petition fails and is dismissed. No costs.
(SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE Vivek Tripathi