LEELA P.T. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these cases relate to the appointment to the post of Anganwadi Helpers and Workers. W.P. (C).Nos.20669 of 2018 and 21569 of 2018 are filed challenging the Government Order issued on 30.04.2018, by which it is directed that Anganwadi Helpers would be promoted against the 4 th vacancy of Anganwadi Workers arising in the Panchayath/Municipality/Project in a Corporation, maintaining the 25% quota for promotion. It is also ordered that 10% of the posts in a Project would be earmarked for appointment to the dependents of those who surrendered land for construction of Anganwadies. The priority for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Workers have also been altered consequent to this.

(2.) The other writ petitions are filed seeking implementation of the order dated 30.04.2018. While petitioners in W.P.(C).Nos. 12879 of 2018 and 32844 of 2016 are temporary Anganwadi Workers included in the seniority list for regular appointment, petitioners in W.P.(C).No.1181 of 2019 is a dependent of a person surrendered land for setting up Anganwadies, who is denied appointment because of the interim order passed by this Court in W.P(C).No.20669 of 2016. As the issue arising in these cases are common, these writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. The parties and documents referred to in these judgments are as described in W.P. (C).No.20669 of 2018 unless otherwise specified.

(3.) The petitioners are Anaganwadi Helpers, who are eligible for promotion as Anganwadi workers on completion of 10 years' service with pass in SSLC. Appointments to 25% of the posts of Anganwadi workers were being made by promotion of qualified Anganwadi Helpers. They allege that the order dated 30.04.2018 takes away their right to appointment under the 25% quota with first priority, only to favour those who have worked on temporary basis occasionally for certain period. It is alleged that the order does not disclose any reason for such a modification; though the order refers to certain letters dated 28.02.2018 and 26.04.2018 from the Director of Women and Child Development and nothing is stated for taking away their priority and the quota which was allowed in accordance with the orders issued by the Central Government and ignoring their long experience to favour those who worked just 6 months on temporary basis. It is their contention that the order is passed only on the basis of certain objections/ apprehensions and hence it is arbitrary.