Kerala High Court
Raji P.V vs The Director Of Social Welfare ... on 21 April, 2016
Author: P.V.Asha
Bench: P.V.Asha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1940
WP(C).No. 11066 of 2018
----------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------
RAJI P.V.,
AGED 42 YEARS, W/O.BALAN,
SNEHA SOORYA, AROOR P.O.,
PERUMUNDACHERY, KOZHIKODE - 673 507.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD
SRI.A.RENJIT
SRI.V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR
SRI.A.MOHAMMED SAVAD
SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE PROJECT OFFICER,
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICE
SCHEME ICDS PROJECT,
TUNERI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673 020.
3. THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
KOZHIKODE - 673 020.
4. THE PURAMERI GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
REP. BY THE SECRETARY, PURAMERY P.O.,
KOZHIKODE - 673 020.
5. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
SOCIAL JUSTICE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
R1 TO R3 & R5 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
mbr/
WP(C).No. 11066 of 2018 (G)
--------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
----------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST APPROVED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT DATED 21.04.2016.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE
MINISTRY OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DATED 06.10.2006.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.12.2017
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.12.2017
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.01.2018 IN
WP(C)NO.528/2018.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
---------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
mbr/
06.04.2018.
P.V.ASHA J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.11066 of 2018
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner who has been working as a temporary Anganwadi Worker has approached this Court again complaining that the vacancies of Anganwadi Workers are going to be filled up by promotion of Anganwadi Helpers.
2. In Ext.P5 judgment itself this Court had made it clear that the Anganwadi Workers will get preference only after exhausting the 25% quota set apart from Anganwadi Helpers. In Ext.P5 judgment, the instructions received from the Government Pleader was recorded. According to which, there are 31 posts of Anganwadi Workers and as at present there is only one person holding the post of Anganwadi Worker on being W.P.(C).No.11066 of 2018 2 promoted from the post of Anganwadi Helper. Therefore the vacancies which are arising are to be allocated to 25% quota of Anganwadi Workers. That writ petition is disposed of directing the 1 st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner. Even before the representation was considered petitioner has again filed this writ petition stating that the vacancy of Anganwadi Worker available under ICDS Tuneri project in Puramery Grama Panchayath is going to be filled up by promotion of Anganwadi Helpers without considering the seniority list of the temporary Anganwadi Workers.
3. The petitioner claims that when one vacancy is filled up by way of promotion the next vacancy is to be filled up from among the temporary Anganwadi Workers like petitioner.
4. But the circular dated 14.11.2016 referring to the Government Orders G.O(M.S) 82/2010 dated 24.11.2010, G.O(M.S) 80/2015/SJD dated 29.12.2015 and W.P.(C).No.11066 of 2018 3 Government letters provide for the criteria for filling up the vacancies of Anganwadi Workers. The vacancies are to be filled up firstly by way of transfer of Anganwadi Workers within the Panchayath / Municipality/ Corporation and thereafter by promotion against the 25% of the posts from among the Anganwadi Helpers by promotion. The temporary Anganwadi Workers come under the 5th priority. Therefore, petitioner cannot claim any appointment in preference to the Helpers who are under the 2 nd priority as per the rules which are in force. As long as the rules / orders in force do not provide for any preference to the temporary Anganwadi Workers, petitioner cannot claim that existing vacancy is to be filled up by appointing Anganwadi Workers from the consolidated seniority list of temporary Anganwadi Workers. I have already considered similar claim raised by Anganwadi Workers which was rejected in my judgment dated 01.03.2018 in W.P.(C)No.32493/2017. W.P.(C).No.11066 of 2018 4
5. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the 1 st respondent is taking steps for a hearing of the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment and orders will be passed without further delay. It is pointed out that due to bifurcation of the department, the Anganwadi Workers now come under Child and Women Development Department, for which there is another Director. Therefore the hearing could not be held pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment and steps are taken for the hearing. At any rate petitioner should not have approached this court again with the very same grievance before the 2 nd respondent took a decision.
In view of the above circumstances, no relief can be granted to petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
ww