DOLAN MUKHERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners applied for engagement as Anganwadi Workers and Helpers in an Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme in the Government quota/Home quota. Initially, 28 candidates applied for the said posts. The initial list of 28 candidates was sent by the Director to District Programme Officer (ICDS), Purulia on February 25, 2020. Subsequently, a second list containing names of candidates was forwarded by the Director on January 19, 2021. 15 candidates were appointed pursuant to the second list of eligible candidates dated January 19, 2021. The said 15 candidates were given appointment in home quota pursuant to an office memo dated February 15, 2022, published by the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), ICDS Project-Kasipur, District-Purulia. The said information was received pursuant to an application made under the Right to Information Act, 2005 by some of the petitioners on January 27, 2022.

(2.) The petitioners made representations on January 22, 2021 inquiring about the fate of their appointments, pursuant to the first list sent by the Director of ICDS on February 25, 2020. Thereafter, the petitioners again reiterated their prayers on January 13, 2022 for their engagement as Anganwadi workers/helpers. Upon learning that candidates from a latter list/panel of candidates dated January 19, 2021 were given letters of appointment/engagement, they agitated their grievances before the Director in January 2022. No reply to the said representations of the petitioners was received by them. Since the petitioners were neither engaged nor informed the reason why candidates from a latter list of candidates were engaged, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.

(3.) Mr. Chatterjee, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the engagement of all the 15 candidates from the second list of candidates dated January 19, 2021 is arbitrary and illegal. What necessitated the preparation of a second list of candidates has not been explained by the respondent authorities, pending the engagement of the Candidates from the first list. The Director of ICDS by an office memo dated August 19, 2021 recommended the appointment of 15 candidates from the second list without giving any explanation as to why the eligible candidates from the first list were not recommended for appointment. Pursuant to the recommendation of the respondent no. 4/Director of ICDS, the aforesaid 15 candidates were given appointment on February 15, 2022 by the CDPO/the respondent no. 6.