Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/3 vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 1 April, 2022
Author: Michael Zothankhuma
Bench: Michael Zothankhuma
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010127972021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6327/2019
BINA BALA ROY AND ANR.
W/O- SRI DIBONATH ROY
R/O- VILL- KISMAT HASDAHA PT-IV
P.O. KISMAT HASDAHA
DIST- DHUBRI (ASSAM)
PIN- 783334
2: FATEMA KHATUN
W/O- AUWAL SHEIKH
R/O- VILL- FALIMARI PT-II
P.O. FALIMARI
DIST- DHUBRI (ASSAM)
PIN- 783325
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT.
GHY-6
2:THE DIRECTOR
SOCIAL WELFARE ASSAM UZAN BAZAAR
GHY-1
3:THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER
DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN- 783301
4:THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER
GAURIPUR ICDS PROJECT DHUBRI
ASSAM
PIN- 783331
------------
Advocate for : G UDDIN
Page No.# 2/3
Advocate for : GA
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
01.04.2022 Heard Mr. A.H. Sarkar, Advocate appearing on behalf of Mr. G. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned counsel for all the respondents.
2. The petitioners in the present writ petition have made a challenge to the order dated 12.06.2019 passed by the respondent no.2, by which the petitioners' overage has not been relaxed. They have also made a challenge to Clause 6 of the Guidelines provided in the Notification dated 04.03.2013, which is the procedure to be followed for appointment of Anganwadi Helper and promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker.
3. Clause 6 of the Guidelines provided in the Notification dated 04.03.2013 requires Anganwadi Helpers to be not above 45 years of age, for promotion to the post of Anganwadi Worker.
4. In the case of Dr. Ami Lal Bhat vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors, reported in (1997) 6 SCC 614, the Apex Court has held that one must accept that such a cut off date cannot be fixed with any mathematical Page No.# 3/3 precision and in such a manner as would avoid hardship in all conceivable cases. As soon as a cut off date is fixed there will be some persons who fall on the right side of the cut off date and some on the wrong side. That cannot make the cut off date, per se, arbitrary unless the cut off date is so wide off the mark as to make it wholly unreasonable. Fixing an independent cut off date, far from being arbitrary, makes for certainty in determining the maximum age. Unless the date is grossly unreasonable, the Court would be reluctant to strike down such cut-off date.
5. This Court does not find the cut off age of 45 to be unreasonable, keeping in view that the task of an Anganwadi Worker is to supervise children all day. Thus, this Court finds no merit in this writ petition.
6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant