KAJAL DEBBARMA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sharma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondents No.1-5 and Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondent No.6.

(2.) The petitioner, who is a Anganwadi Worker, is slated to retire on 30/6/2019. She has urged this court to direct the respondents to set aside the notification No.46(176)- ICDS/SWE/2012/1557(94) dtd. 7/7/2012 issued by the respondent No.2, the memorandum under No.F.46(54)- ICDS/SWE/2015/7780(69) dtd. 15/5/2015 issued by the respondent No.3 and the memorandum No.F.2(29)/CDPO/ICDS/MNU/ADC(D)/2016/321-43 dtd. 7/6/2019 issued by the respondent No.5. The memorandum dtd. 7/6/2019 has obviously been issued in contemplation of the petitioner's retirement on 30/6/2019.

(3.) The fundamental challenge is that the age of retirement or discontinuation of the service after 60 years is contrary to the policy as declared by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India. By virtue of the memorandum dtd. 30/9/2015 [Annexure-5 to the writ petition] the petitioner has made an attempt to show that there is no uniformity in the age of retirement/discontinuation of the service of the Anganwadi Workers or Anganwadi Helpers. Even though by the notification dtd. 7/7/2012 [Annexure-6 to the writ petition] and the memorandum dtd. 15/5/2015, it has been categorically asserted that the upper age limit of the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers under Education (SW and SE) Department who are honorarium based workers shall be 60(sixty) years. The same view has also been categorically expressed in the memorandum dtd. 15/5/2015 [Annexure-7 to the writ petition]. For purpose of reference the entire text of the notification dtd. 7/7/2012 and the memorandum dtd. 15/5/2015 are extracted hereunder one after another: