Case Note & Summary
The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, challenging the selection and appointment of the fourth respondent as Anganwadi Worker at Keelarangiam Anganwadi Centre, Thiruppuvanam Block, Sivagangai District. The petitioner, a resident of the same village and belonging to the BC Community, was a destitute widow who lost her husband in 2014. She was doing coolie work and caring for her in-laws and daughter with meagre income. The respondents called for applications for the post of Anganwadi Worker; the petitioner applied and attended the interview on 06.09.2017. She was among six applicants and considered herself more qualified and entitled to preference as a destitute widow, alleging that the fourth respondent was trying to secure the appointment through influence and that her husband was a government employee, making her not actually qualified. The petitioner submitted a representation to the first respondent on 06.11.2017 and then filed the present writ petition. At the admission stage, the court directed the official respondents to keep one post vacant. The legal issues centred on whether the selection of the fourth respondent was valid given the specific government guidelines providing preference to destitute widows. The petitioner's counsel argued that the official respondents failed to consider the proceedings of the Special Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Social Welfare and NMP (S.W.7) Department, dated 20.03.2008, which directed that destitute widows and the poor should be given preference. The guidelines required grant of marks for residence, age, educational qualification, economic condition, and other priorities such as widow status. The petitioner contended that no other priority candidate existed, and thus she should have been appointed. The respondents, per contra, submitted that the appointment was made in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.110, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme (SW-7) Department, dated 14.05.2012, and that the fourth respondent was older than the petitioner (32 years versus 30 years), hence selected. They also pointed out that other vacancies existed in nearby Anganwadi centres. The court considered the rival submissions and examined the records. It noted that the petitioner was indeed a destitute widow, aged 30, with Higher Secondary qualification, while the fourth respondent was 32 with SSLC qualification and did not have widow status. The court referred to a decision in V. Lakshmi v. Special Commissioner & Secretary to Government, Social Welfare & N.M.P. Department, Chennai, and Others, 2011 (3) MLJ 85, where it was held that preference to a destitute widow must be considered by the Selection Committee. Applying that precedent, the court held that the fourth respondent ought not to have been considered in view of the guidelines, and the petitioner's preferential claim was wrongly ignored. However, noting that four Anganwadi Worker vacancies were available in centres within 10 km of the petitioner's residence, the court declined to disturb the fourth respondent's appointment already made. Instead, it directed the first respondent, the District Collector, to appoint the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker in any Anganwadi Centre nearer to her residence, provided she otherwise satisfies the prescribed conditions. The appointment was to be completed within two months from the receipt of the order copy. The writ petition was accordingly allowed with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Public Employment - Preference in Selection - Government Guidelines - Proceedings of Special Commissioner, dated 20.03.2008 - Destitute widow must be given preference in appointment as Anganwadi Worker. The petitioner, a destitute widow, attended interview but was not appointed; the fourth respondent, who was older but not a destitute widow, was selected. The court held that overlooking the preference vitiated the selection. However, four vacancies existed in nearby Anganwadi Centres, and the court, without disturbing the fourth respondent's appointment, directed the first respondent to appoint the petitioner in any Anganwadi Centre nearer to her residence if she otherwise satisfies the conditions. Held that preference to destitute widow must be respected. (Paras 6-9, 13-14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the selection and appointment of the fourth respondent as Anganwadi Worker was contrary to the guidelines providing preference to destitute widows, and whether the petitioner, a destitute widow, was entitled to be appointed in the said post.
Final Decision
Writ Petition allowed. The first respondent directed to appoint the petitioner as Anganwadi Worker in any Anganwadi Centre nearer to her residence within two months, if she otherwise satisfies prescribed conditions. The appointment of the fourth respondent was not disturbed. No costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Destitute widow receives preference in Anganwadi worker appointment per government guidelines
- selection process must consider priority categories
- court may direct appointment in vacant post without disturbing existing selection if guidelines were not followed
