PRADESH AND OTHERSversusPUNRADEVI

                      [2015]4S.C.R.154


A       STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS

                               v.

                         PUNRADEVI
.B            CivilAppeal Nos. 3120-3121 of2015

                       MARCH 24, 2015

         [DIPAK MISRA AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.]
c Service Law- Promotion- OfAnganwari Helper of one centre
  - To the post of Anganwari Worker in another Anganwari
  Centre - On the basis of communication issued by the
  Director, Social Justice and Empowerment- Held: In view of
D the communication, the Integrated Child Development
  Scheme rlw the relevant guidelines, Anganwari Helper of one
  centre cannot seek promotion to the postofAnganwari Worker
  of another centre.

E         Allowing the appeals, the Court

         HELD: The communication dated 10.05.2012,
  issued by the appellant No. 2 (Director, Social Justice
  and Empowerment to CDPOs of the State Provides that
F if a post of Anganwari Worker (AWW) falls vacant in an
  Anganwari Centre, Anganwari Helper (AWH) of the same
  centre can be considered for her appointment to the post
  of AWW, giving her priority. Thus, the area of one
  Anganwari Centre is not the feeder area of another
G Anganwari Centre. The High Court has erred in law in
  unnecessarily interpreting the above provision, to make
  the same applicable for appointment I promotion of AWH
  from one Anganwari Centre to another Anganwari Centre
  by observing that honorarium which was being drawn
H
                              154
  STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS v.                    155
                PUNRA DEVI

by such candidate shall not be added to her income in A
the income certificate required for the post. In fact
communication dated 10.05.2012 does not reflect that
honorarium is required to be added in the income of AWH
of that centre for her appointment as AWW in the same
centre. Therefore, in view of the Integrated Child B
Development Scheme read with relevant guidelines, the
High Court has erred in directing the appellants to
consider the case of the respondent. [Paras 9, 10 and
12] [160-H; 161-A-D, G]
                                                              c
      CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No.
3120-3121 of2015

      From the Judgment and Order dated 6.3.2013 of the
High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in CWP No. 7879 D
of 2012-H] and order dated 23.5.2014 in R.P. No. 7126 of
2013.

       Suryanarayana Singh,AAG, Pragati Neekhra for the
Appellants.                                                   E

       The Judgm~nt of the Court was delivered by

       PRAFULLA C. PANT, J. 1. Leave granted.

        2. These appeals arise out of judgment and order dated F
6.3.2013, passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at
Shimla in CWP No. 7879 of 2012-H whereby the High Court
has disposed of said writ petition allowing the respondent
(writ petitioner), who isAnganwari Helper atAnganwari Centre, G
Chari, to the post of Anganwari Worker in Anganwari Centre,
Hardeeppur. The review petition filed by the appellants
before the High Court has also been dismissed vide order
dated 23.5.2014. The same is also challenged before us.
                                                              H
156         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2015] 4 S.C.R.


A            3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants. No one
      turned up on beh:::ilf of the respondent even after sufficient
      service reported on her.

           4. Brief facts of the case are that respondent Punra
B Devi was appointed on 13.8.2007 as Anganwari Helper in
    Anganwari Centre, Chori, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.
    There are two Anganwari Centres, namely, Anganwari Centre,
    Chori and Anganwari Centre, Hardeeppur, which fall within
    the limits of village panchayat Lagnru. Appellant No. 2,
C Director, Department of Social Justice and Empowerment,
    Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, issued communication dated
    10.5.2012 to all Child Development Project Officers
    (C.D.P.Os) of the State informing that in case the post of
D Anganwari Worker (AWW) falls vacant in any Anganwari
    Centre, the Anganwari Helper (AWH) working at the same
    centre can also be considered on priority basis for
    appointment to the post of AWW. Claiming the benefit of
    above communication, respondent submitted her application
E for the post of AWW in Anganwari Centre, Hardeeppur, to
    Child Development Project Officer (CDPO) Dehra, District
  . Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. She also made a representation
    to appellant No. 2 seeking her appointment on the above
    mentioned post. When her request was not accepted, she
F filed writ petition (CWP No. 7879 of 2012) before the High
    Court seeking following reliefs: -

           "i. That the respondents may very kindly be
           directed to consider the petitioner for appointment
G          to the post of Anganwari Worker in Anganwari
           Centre Hardeeppur under the Child Development
           Project Officer, Dehra, District Kangra without
           insisting upon the conditions of prescribed limit to
           the family income of the petitioner, because of
H
  STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS v.                        157
       PUNRA DEVI [PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.]

     her already working asAnganwari Helper, in the              A
     interest of justice.

     ii. That the respondents may also be directed to
     apply the instructions issued by the respondent
     No. 2 on 10.05.2012 atAnnexure P-5 in the case               B
     of the petitioner also so as to consider her for
     appointment as Anganwari Worker in Aganwari
     Centre Hardeeppur on account of her already
     working as Anganwari Helper in Anganwari Centre
     Chori and her possess the requisite qualifications          C
     of +2, in the interest of justice.

     iii. That the respondents may also be directed to
     create 2 to 3 promotional avenues to the Anganwari
     Worker to the next higher post, in the interest of           D
     justice.

     iv. That the entire record of the case may very
     kindly be summoned from the respondent for the
     kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.                          E

     v.  That any other order or direction which this
     Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts
     and circumstances of the present case, may be
     passed in favour of the petitioner and against the           F
     respondent."

       5. The High Court disposed of the above ·writ petition
allowing the respondent to apply for the post of AWW of
Hardeeppur with certain observations, which is challenged G
before us by the appellants, after rejection of the review
application.

         6. The only issue involved in these appeals before us
is as to whether an Anganwari Helper (AWH) of one Anganwari       H
158         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                     [2015] 4 S.C.R.



A     Centre can seek promotion to the post of Anganwari Worker
      (AWW) of the another Anganwari Centre, or not?

               7. Be it noted, Integrated Child Development Scheme
      (ICDS) is a centrally sponsored flagship Scheme of the
8     Government of India which envisages six services, i.e.,
      supplementary nutrition, immunization, health check-up,
      referral services, pre-school non-formal education and
      nutrition and health education. The AWWs and AWHs are
      community based frontline honorary workers under the ICDS,
C     and are central figure in helping the community as to the needs
      of their children by delivery of seNices under the Scheme. They
      are required to be appointed from the local community who
      come forward to render their seNices, on part-time basis in
      the area of child care and development. As per the
0
      guidelines, selections of AWWs and AWHs require that the
      women appointed for such seNices should be from local
      village and acceptable to the local community.

              8. In the light of the guidelines of the Central
E     Government, Government of Himachal Pradesh issued its
      notifications from time to time in connection with appointment
      of AWWs/AWHs. Paragraphs, relevant to this case,
      contained in the Notification No. WLF-8(14)3/87-1 dated
F     Shimla 19.6.2010, which was issued in supersession of the
      previous notifications, are being reproduced below: -

                     "In partial modification of this department
           notification of even dated 5th October, 2009 and
           dated 8th January, 2010 the Governor, Himachal
G
           Pradesh is pleased to substitute the provision o{
           following rules: -

                  Rule 4 i.e. Eligibility Criteria;

H
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS v.                     159
     PUNRA DEVI [PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.)

  Only such female candidates are eligible to apply for      A
  the post of Anganwadi Worker or Helper who are

  a) Family wise freezing of the list of families being
  covered in the feeder area of the AWC will be ensured
  as on first January of recruitment year before starting    B
  the selection process and advertising of vacancies
  with due publicity and only the residents of the
  areas as above will be entitled to apply. If the
  candidates are not available within the feeder
  area, applications can be invited from the desirous       c
  candidates residing within the area of the concerned
  Gram Panchayat in case the feeder area falls in 2
  Gram Panchayats prior approval of the Director
  SJ&E H.P. will be required.
                                                             D
  b)    For Anganwadi worker minimum qualification
  shall be 10+2 or equivalent and for Helper minimum
  qualification shall be Middle.

               xxx         xxx         xxx                   E

  d) The annual income of the family of candidates
  does not exceed Rs.15000/- per annum which is to
  be certified/countersigned by an officer not below
  the rank of Tehsildar/Naib Tehsildar/Executive             F
  Magistrate.

  Rule 5 i.e. Advertisement of vacancies: - Following
  provision to be added: -
                                                            G
     Provided, where the post of AWW has fallen vacant
  due to any reason and the matter is not sub judice
  theAnganwadi Helper shall be given first opportunity
  to be appointed as worker if, she fulfills the minimum
  prescribed educational qualification for AWWs and          H
160       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                     [2015] 4 S.C.R.



A        no advertisement will be required.

                      xxx         xxx         xxx

         Terms and conditions of services
B        Rule 4 i.e. Transfer/Adjustment of the Anganwadi
         Worker Helpers.

            Under ICDS programme there is no provision of
         transfer of Anganwadi Workers/Helpers as these
c        are honorary workers. However, only in case of
         marriage of AWW or AWH if, vacancy exists at the
         place of her husband's normal place or residence/
         place of marriage, she can be adjusted on her
         request made within one month from date of arising
D
         of vacancy. Divorce/destitute women living with their
         parents in Anganwadi area, but working at the place
         of marriage can be transferred to the place of
         Anganwadi falling in the parental area subject to
E        availability of vacancy. Distt. Programme Officer will
         be the competent authority to order transfer/
         adjustment of Anganwadi workers/helpers within the
         District. Outside district transfers will be done with
         the approval of Director."
F
          9. It is not the case of the respondent that due to her
  marriage or divorce she is required to be transferred from
  one centre to another centre, nor is her case for promotion/
  appointment from the post of AWH to AWW in the same
G Anganwari Centre. Admittedly, she was appointed in 2007
  asAWH inAnganwari Centre, Chori. Now she has prayed
  for her appointment to the post of AWW in Anganwari Centre
  Hardeeppur. It is not disputed that the communication
  dated 10.5.2012, issued by the appellant No. 2 (Director,
H
  STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS v.                    161
       PUNRA DEVI [PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.]

Social Justice and Empowerment) to CDPOs of the State A
provides that if a post of AWW falls vacant in an Anganwari
Centre, AWH of the same centre can be considered for her
appointment to the post of AWW, giving her priority.

        10. Considering the facts as above, we are of the B
opinion that the High Court has erred in law in unnecessarily
interpreting the above provision, to make the same applicable
for appointmenUpromotion of AWH from one Anganwari
Centre to another Anganwari Centre by observing that
honorarium which was being drawn by such candidate shall C
not be added to her income in the income certificate required
for the post. In fact communication dated 10.5.2012 does
not reflect that honorarium is required to be added in the
income of AWH of that centre for her appointment as AWW in D
the same centre.

       11. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted
before us that, vide letter No. SJE-A-E(20)171/2012 dated
18.9.2013 read with notification No. SJE-A-F(1)-3/2011 dated E
3.9.2013, the State Government has already clarified that the
honorarium being paid to the Anganwari Helper shall not be
considered for the income of family in the case of a candidate
who applies for the post of Anganwari Worker. It is further
pointed out to us that the conditipn regarding requirement of F
same feeder area remains unchanged.

        12. In view of the above, having heard learned counsel
for the appellants, and further considering the ICDS read with
relevant guidelines, we are of the view that the High Court has G
erred in directing the appellants to consider the case of the
respondent, who isAWH in the Anganwari Centre of Chari,
for the post of AWW in the Anganwari Centre of
Hardeeppur. Needless to say that the area of one Anganwari
Centre is not the feeder area of another Anganwari Centre. H
162          SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2015] 4 S.C.R.


A     Therefore, in our opinion the impugned orders passrd by
      the High Court cannot be sustained.               '·

         13. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed. The
  impugned orders dated 6.3.2013 passed in CWP No. 7879 .
B of 2012-H, and the order dated 23.5.2014 passed in CMF?
  (M) No. 12086_of2013 (in RPST 7126 of 2013), by the High
  Court are hereby set aside. There shall be no order as to
  costs.

C     Kalpana K. Tripathy                       Appeals allowed.