BINITA SARKAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. D. Das, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned standing counsel for Social Welfare Department, Assam. None appeared for Respondent No. 7.

(2.) By invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners have challenged the validity and legality of the advertisement dated 9.9.2009 vide Annexure 2 on the ground that no provision for reservation of post in respect of candidates for the post of Anganwadi Worker and Helper belonging to Scheduled Caste community has been made in the impugned advertisement. While putting the advertisement in question under challenge, the Petitioners contended that among the newly sanctioned Anganwadi centres, the No. 128 Das Para Anganwadi Centre is situated at Das Para area of Niz Monirchar revenue village and the centre has been named as No. 128 Das Para Anganwadi Centre. It has been further contended in the writ petition that the Das Para area is mostly populated by Scheduled Caste community and keeping in view the backwardness of the people of the said area, the government sanctioned the Anganwadi centre at Das Para for upliftment of the community. According to the Petitioners, keeping in view the population pattern of the locality for which the centre in question was sanctioned by the government as well as the statutory provision relating to the reservation policy and the government notification dated 19.9.2009 (vide Annexure 1 to the Additional Affidavit filed by the Petitioners), the Respondent-authorities ought to have reserved at least two posts of Anganwadi worker and helper sanctioned for No. 128 Das Para Anganwadi Centre. Having not done that, according to Petitioners, the impugned advertisement is liable to be set aside.

(3.) During the course of argument, it has been submitted by Mr. Das, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners that the Respondent No. 4 has admitted in her affidavit-in-opposition that though as per Government guidelines dated 19.9.2009 (Annexure A to the affidavit-in-opposition) the reservation policy for SC/ST/Tea Tribes should be followed for filling up the vacancies of Anganwadi worker/helper, that is not done inadvertently in No. 128 Das Para Anganwadi Centre. He further submits that the Respondent No. 5, i.e., the selection board has also admitted in its affidavit-in-opposition that the reservation for SC/ST could not be mentioned inadvertently and the Respondent No. 5 has tendered apology therefor which indicates that the two posts in question ought to have been filled up by candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste community. Further, having drawn the attention of this Court to the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent No. 2, Mr. Das submits that upon perusal of the statements made on oath in the counter affidavit, it would reveal that similar illegalities have been committed by the Social Welfare Department, Assam, in other Anganwadi centres also. Mr. Das submits that the counter affidavit of Respondent No. 2 is absolutely silent as to what actions have been initiated or taken against the erring officers for commission of such serious illegalities which have resulted in deprivation of legitimate rights of the candidates belonging to reserved categories.