SURJIT KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition filed by the petitioner, vires of Punjab Social Security and Development of Women and children (Group-C) Non-Ministerial Service Rules, 2001 is challenged. A specific challenged is to Rule 6 of the said rules read with Appendix "B" thereto which provides for appointment to the post of Supervisor. Insofar as appointment to the post of Supervisor is concerned, 25% posts are filled up by direct recruitment and 75% from amongst Anganwadi Workers. However, even among Anganwadi Workers, out of 75% quota assigned to them, 35% quota is earmarked for Anganwadi Workers who are matriculate with 8 years experience and 35% quota assigned to Anganwadi Workers who are Graduate with 3 years experience. The remaining 5% quota is to be filled up from amongst Bal Sewakas or Greh Sewakas who are working for a minimum period of 8 years.

(2.) The precise challenge is to the fixation of 35% promotion quota for those Anganwari Workers who are matriculate with 8 years experience and separate 35% promotion quota for graduate Anganwari Workers with 3 years experience. Submission is that there should not be separate quotas for matriculate and graduate Anganwari Workers.

(3.) In the first blush, we found that prescription of different quotas may not be a wiser step and may lead to anomalous results and, therefore, when the matter was heard on 23.1.2013, Mr. Puri, learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Punjab was given time to have instructions in this regard as to whether the Government would be willing to make suitable amendments in the rules. After receiving instructions, Mr. Puri reported that that may not be feasible and, on the contrary, the fixation of separate quotas was in the interest of all the three categories as mentioned in Appendix "B" to the 2001 Rules. In these circumstances, we heard the matter on merits.