JUDGMENT B.P. Singh & Ashish N. Trivedi, JJ. These two petitions involve common questions and, therefore, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. There are seventeen petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 6220 of 1993 and twentifive petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 7342 of 1993. All of them were appointed as Anganwari workers. The petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 6220 of 1993 were appointed as Anganwari workers in Laxmipur Block in January 1990, while the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 7342 of 1993 were appointed as Anganwari workers of Sikandra Block in the years 1982 and 1983. All of them are aggrieved by the decision taken by the State Government pursuant to which their selection/appointment as Anganwari workers has been cancelled after issuing to them a notice to show cause. Their main grievance is that the decision taken by the Government is arbitrary and contrary to the scheme framed by the Central Government. They, therefore, contend that the termination of their appointment, or cancellation of their selection, after so many years of service is clearly-arbitrary. They submit that the basis on which the Government decision proceeds, namely, that the scheme is meant for the benefit of only Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and expectant mothers belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes is unwarranted, as the scheme itself lays down in clear terms that the benefits of the package of services offered under the scheme is available to all children and expectant mothers, and is not conceived to benefit only persons belonging to any particular class, tribe or caste. 2. The representative facts are taken from C.W.J.C. No. 6220 of 1993. The case of the petitioners is that under the scheme known as Integrated Child Development Services Scheme (hereinafter referred to as the I.C.D.S), Anganwari Centres were opened in several blocks in the then district of Munger. Such Centres were opened in the year 1982 in Sikandra Block and later in the year 1984 and 1985 in the Jamui Block. There was some delay in the opening of such Centres in Laxmipur Block, but ultimately in the year 1988 and 1989, 166 Anganwari Centres were sanctioned in Laxmipur Block. The Acting Child Development Project Officer issued a notice on 28.2.1989 calling for applications from eligible female candidates. The last date for filing such applications was 15th March 1989. There was some delay in the opening of such Centres in Laxmipur Block, but ultimately in the year 1988 and 1989, 166 Anganwari Centres were sanctioned in Laxmipur Block. The Acting Child Development Project Officer issued a notice on 28.2.1989 calling for applications from eligible female candidates. The last date for filing such applications was 15th March 1989. A copy of the said notice has been annexed as Annexure-7 from which it appears that only those female candidates were eligible for selection as Anganwari workers, who were permanent residents of the village or Mohalla where the Centre was located, and who were daughters-in-law of the same Tola or village where the Centre was located. Matriculates were to be given the first preference followed by non-matriculates and uneducated candidates. The candidates were also required to submit certificate of resident from the concerned authority, and if any candidate belonged to the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe category, she was required to enclose certificate in proof of her caste or tribe. The candidates were also required to furnish certificate in support of their educational qualification. The petitioners and many others applied in response to the notice and they duly appeared before the Committee constituted for the purpose of selecting Anganwari workers in accordance with the scheme of the Central Government, After the selection process was over, the petitioners were selected for appointment as Anganwari workers. Those who possessed the matriculation qualification were to be paid honorarium of Rs. 275/- and those who were non-matriculate were to be paid Rs. 225/- per month (subsequently enhanced). A sample copy of the letter of selection has been annexed as Annexure-8 to the writ petition and is dated 25.1.1990. The petitioners claim that they were thereafter sent for training, and after their training was complete they were subjected to written test as also to practical test. After successfully passing the tests, a certificate was issued to them in proof of their having obtained the necessary training. They thereafter continued to work as Anganwari workers to the satisfaction of all concerned. They also assert that they are all daughters-in-law of the village where Anganwari Centres are located and are also mothers. Some of the petitioners are matriculate while some others are non-matriculate. They are all permanent residents of the village where the Centres have been opened. 3. They thereafter continued to work as Anganwari workers to the satisfaction of all concerned. They also assert that they are all daughters-in-law of the village where Anganwari Centres are located and are also mothers. Some of the petitioners are matriculate while some others are non-matriculate. They are all permanent residents of the village where the Centres have been opened. 3. It appears that the Secretary in the Department of Social Welfare wrote a letter to all the Divisional Commissioners, District Magistrates and Deputy Development Commissioners intimating to them the decisions taken by the State Government in regard to I.C.D.S. The first paragraph of the letter states that the child development scheme was an important scheme for the benefit of weaker and oppressed classes. The Government had come to know that the scheme was not being properly implemented at the regional level and, therefore, with a view to properly implement the scheme the Government had taken some decisions. In the instant writ petitions we are not concerned with all the decisions which have been communicated under the said letter, but the decisions as contained in paragraph nos. 1 and 3 of the said letter are relevant. In paragraph no. 1 of the letter it is stated that the Anganwari Centres must necessarily be located only at those places where the residents are Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes. If any Anganwari Centre had been established at any other place, they should immediately be shifted to appropriate place. In paragraph no. 3 of the letter it is stated that the Government had found that in the matter of selection of Anganwari Sevika/ Assistants many irregularities had been committed. Reference was made to the guidelines issued by the Central Government, and it was stated that in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines Anganwari Sevika/Assistants must be selected only from that class of beneficiaries for whose benefit the Centres had been opened and, therefore, Anganwari Sevika/Assistants must be selected from amongst weaker/oppressed class, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe. Preference shall be given to a Sevika who is a daughter-in-law of the same village and is mother of one or two children. If the selections had been made contrary to the guidelines, such selections must be cancelled immediately and selections shall be made only in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Central Government. 4. Preference shall be given to a Sevika who is a daughter-in-law of the same village and is mother of one or two children. If the selections had been made contrary to the guidelines, such selections must be cancelled immediately and selections shall be made only in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Central Government. 4. From the aforesaid letter dated 11th June, 1992, which is annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition, it appears that the State Government was of the view that I.C.D.S. was meant to benefit only the weaker and oppressed classes and that the Anganwari workers or Assistants employed in connection with the implementation of the scheme must belong to the beneficiary class, meaning thereby that they should belong to the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or other backward classes. 5. Pursuant to the decision of the State Government, as contained in Annexure-1, the District Welfare Officer, Jamui, wrote to the Child Development Scheme Officer, Jamui (Laxmipur and Sikandra) on 1.12.1992 drawing his notice to the decisions taken by the State Government and directing him to take necessary action. He further directed him to give to the concerned persons one week's time to file their show cause, whereafter appropriate orders may be issued. Pursuant to Annexure-2 a show cause notice was issued to the petitioners, as is evident from Annexure-3 dated 8.1.1993. The said show cause notice refers to the decision of the State Government, as contained in Annexure-1 dated 11.6.1992, and proceeds to call upon the petitioners to show cause why their selection be not held to be improper since they did not belong to the beneficiary class. The petitioners were called upon to file their show cause within one week. 6. Pursuant to the show cause notices issued to the petitioners, they filed their replies, as directed, in which they stated that they had been duly selected by a Committee which has been constituted for the purpose. They further represented that the notice which had been issued pursuant to which they had applied did not require that the candidates must belong to the beneficiary class. The petitioners were poor workers and had worked for considerable period as Anganwari workers. It was, therefore, submitted that there was no irregularity in their selection as Anganwari workers. They further represented that the notice which had been issued pursuant to which they had applied did not require that the candidates must belong to the beneficiary class. The petitioners were poor workers and had worked for considerable period as Anganwari workers. It was, therefore, submitted that there was no irregularity in their selection as Anganwari workers. After the petitioners had filed their show cause, the impugned order (Annexure-5) was issued on 16.6.1993 informing the petitioners that their selection as Anganwari workers had been cancelled. The impugned orders cancelling the selection of the petitioners as Anganwari workers are identical cyclostyled orders and do not disclose any reason. They merely inform the petitioners that their selection has been cancelled. 7. Under these circumstances, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the letter issued by the State Government dated 11.6.1992 (Annexure-1) as also the order cancelling their selection (Annexure 5 series) dated 16.6.1993. Similar relief has been claimed in C.W.J.C No. 7342 of 1993 in which there are twenty-five petitioners who were selected as Anganwari workers in the year 1982 and 1983 and whose selection has been cancelled by issuing similar orders on 16.6.1993 after they had worked for almost ten years. 8. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that a mere reading of the scheme formulated by the Central Government would make it clear that the scheme is for the benefit of all children, nursing and expectant mothers. There is no such class as "beneficiary class", apart from such children and mothers. In any event, there is no concept of a "beneficiary class" based upon tribe or caste, as the scheme makes available a package of services to all children and mothers who come within the scheme regardless of their caste or tribe. It is, therefore, submitted that the decision of the State Government, as contained in Annexure-1, proceeds on a ground which is non-existent since the scheme formulated by the Central Government does not at all refer to any "beneficiary class" based upon any caste or tribe. The impugned orders issued by the State Government cancelling the selection made on the ground that the petitioners did not belong to such "beneficiary class" based upon caste,• is also arbitrary and discriminatory. The impugned orders issued by the State Government cancelling the selection made on the ground that the petitioners did not belong to such "beneficiary class" based upon caste,• is also arbitrary and discriminatory. On the other hand, counsel for the State contends that the package of services envisaged under the scheme is primarily meant for the benefit of poor and weaker sections of the society and, therefore, the main concern of the Government is to provide such services to children and mothers belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe and those belonging to other backward classes. It is, therefore, that the Government has taken a decision to appoint such females as Anganwari workers who belong to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or other backward classes. He found it difficult to give a legal justification for the action taken, but submitted that on practical considerations the impugned orders should be upheld. 9. The moot question which, therefore, arises for consideration in the writ petitions is whether the ICDS is meant only for the benefit of children and women belonging to the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes who have been described as "beneficiary class", or whether the scheme is meant for all children and mothers who come within the scheme regardless of their caste or tribe. It is not in dispute that the Integrated Child Development Services Scheme is the outcome of the national policy for children adopted by the Government of India laying emphasis on the integrated delivery of early childhood services for expectant and nursing women, based on the recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial Study Teams set up by the Planning Commission. The scheme of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) was evolved to make a coordinated effort for an integrated programme of delivery package of such services. The blue print for the Scheme was drawn by the Ministry of Social Welfare, Government of India in 1975, which called for coordinated and concerted effort by different Ministries, Departments of voluntary organisations. Initially 33 projects were set up on an experimental basis in the years 1975-76. There were 19 rural projects, 10 tribal projects and 4 urban projects spread over all the 22 States and the Union Territory of Delhi, and 67 additional projects were started during the year 1978-79. It was planned that during the period of Sixth Five Year Plan (1980-85) 800 additional Projects will be started. There were 19 rural projects, 10 tribal projects and 4 urban projects spread over all the 22 States and the Union Territory of Delhi, and 67 additional projects were started during the year 1978-79. It was planned that during the period of Sixth Five Year Plan (1980-85) 800 additional Projects will be started. The petitioners have annexed to the writ petition Chapter-2 of the Manual on Integrated Child Development Services published by National Institute of Public Co-operation & Child Development, New Delhi, as per guidelines of Ministeries of Social Welfare, Health and Family Welfare, Education & Culture, Planning Commission, All India Institute of Medical Sciences and the UNICEF which is Annexure-5. It appears therefrom that the objectives of I.C.D.S. Scheme are : (i) to improve the nutritional and health status of children in the age group 0-6 years; (ii) to lay the foundations for proper psychological, physical and social development of the child; (iii) to reduce the incidence of mortality, morbidity, malnutrition and school drop-out; (iv) to achieve effective coordinated policy and its implementation amongst the various departments to promote child development; and (v) to enhance the capability of the mother to look after the normal health and nutritional needs of the child through proper nutrition and health education. The administrative unit for an ICDS project is the community development block in rural areas, tribal development block in predominantly tribal areas and a ward(s) or a group(s) of slums in urban areas. In the selection of project areas, preference is to be given to areas predominantly inhabited by backward tribes or scheduled castes, economically backward area, drought prone areas, and areas in which nutritional deficiency is rampant and is poor in the development of social services. The scheme proceeds on the assumption that a Rural Project (a community development block) has a population of 1,00,000 of which 17 percent i.e. 17,000 will be less than 6 years of age, 3 percent i.e. 3,000 will be less than 1 years, 6 percent i.e. 6,000 will be in the age group of 1-2 years, and 8 percent i.e. 8,000 will be in the age group of 3-5. The number of women in the age group 15-44 years will be 20,000 of which 4,000 will be nursing and expectant mothers. The number of villages in a rural project in rural project is assumed to be 100. The number of women in the age group 15-44 years will be 20,000 of which 4,000 will be nursing and expectant mothers. The number of villages in a rural project in rural project is assumed to be 100. The scheme similarly assumes a certain population for Tribal and Urban projects also with a view to work out the number of children between the age group of zero and six and the number of nursing and expectant mothers under a particular Project. In calculating the number of beneficiaries under the project there is no reference to children or mothers belonging to any particular caste or Tribe. The whole area covered by the project is taken into account as a unit and the percentage of children and beneficiary mothers is worked out on the basis of total population without any further classification into Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and backward classes and other categories. In paragraph no. 2.7 it is stated : "The above averages have been assumed for the purpose of arriving at a first approximation of the number of beneficiaries, costs etc. During visits it has been noted that there are projects in which the entire population of children and mothers are not being covered by the package of services provided under the scheme. It is reiterated that State Governments/Union Territory Administrations should ensure that every project area is divided into Anganwaris so that no area is left out. The number of Anganwaris in those projects should, therefore, be increased so as to cover the entire population. In hilly and desert areas, which may be sparsely populated, villages may be very small. In such cases an Anganwari may be set up in every small village or hamlet having a population of 300 or more. Very small villages/hamlets (with a population less than 300) may be covered by the adjoining Anganwaris. In these villages/hamlets weekly or fortnightly visits by an Anganwari Worker in whose areas such a village is located, can be feasible. In such cases an Anganwari may be set up in every small village or hamlet having a population of 300 or more. Very small villages/hamlets (with a population less than 300) may be covered by the adjoining Anganwaris. In these villages/hamlets weekly or fortnightly visits by an Anganwari Worker in whose areas such a village is located, can be feasible. In some places where population is very scattered (e.g. clusters of 3-4 huts at long distances) especially in hilly areas a take home nutrition may be the only feasible alternative." It would thus appear from the paragraph extracted above that the Government was concerned about the fact that there were projects in which the entire population of children and mothers were not being covered by the package of services provided under the scheme. It was, therefore, suggested that the number of Anganwaris in those projects should be increased so as to cover the entire population. Then follows the passage which is rather significant : "In nut-shell, arrangements in every ICDS block should be made in such a manner so as to ensure that all children, pregnant women and nursing mothers are covered under the programme and no child is deprived of the facilities provided under the ICDS Programme. The number of Anganwaris in each project area may be worked out by the concerned field officer to whom the State Government may entrust this responsibility and information sent to the Ministry of Social Welfare". This again emphasises that arrangement should be made in every ICDS block so as to ensure that all children, pregnant women and nursing mothers are covered under the programme, and no child is deprived of the facilities provided under the ICDS Programme. The other details of the scheme, as contained in Chapter 2 also refer to the benefits of the scheme being made available to the children and mothers covered by the scheme without making any distinction on the basis of caste or tribe. 10. In regard to appointment of Anganwari workers the relevant paragraph are paragraphs 2.16 to 2.18 which read as follows: "2.16 The Anganwari is run by an Anganwari worker. The Anganwari Worker who will be a village level worker/ward level worker would be the incharge for delivery of various services envisaged under the scheme. She should invariably belong to the same village/ ward. The Anganwari Worker who will be a village level worker/ward level worker would be the incharge for delivery of various services envisaged under the scheme. She should invariably belong to the same village/ ward. Each Anganwari Worker will be assisted by a helper who would invariably be a lady belonging to the same village/local community and well-versed in cooking and processing the food, cleaning of Anganwari, utensils etc. She will be paid an honorarium of Rs. 50/- per month. The selection of Anganwari workers will be made by a committee of officials and non-officials at the project level. The number of Anganwari workers in each project, on the basis of assumed averages, is as follows (though as stated above the actual figures will vary from project to project) : Rural Project: 100 Anganwari Workers Tribal Project: 50 Anganwari Workers Urban Project: 100 Anganwari Workers 2.17 The Anganwari worker may be a matriculate or a non-matriculate. If she is a matriculate, she will receive an honorarium of Rs. 175 per month and if a non-matriculate, will get an honorarium of Rs. 125 per month. Though the proportion of matriculate and non-matriculate Anganwari workers will vary from project to project in rural/tribal area, the urban projects will be required to have all matriculate Anganwari workers. 2.18 The Anganwari worker is responsible for : organising pre-school activities in the Anganwari for about 40 children in the age group 3-5 years : arranging supplementary nutrition feeding for children (6 months to 5 years) and expectant and nurshing mothers : giving health and nutrition education to mothers : making home visits for educating parents : eliciting community support and participation : assisting the Primary Health Centre staff in implementation of immunization, health check-up, referral services, family planning and health education programme : maintaining liaison with other institutions and agencies in her area; maintaining liaison with lady school teacher; and maintaining routine files and record. The Anganwari worker will be assisted by a helper, a local woman in organising supplementary nutrition feeding and non-formal pre-school education programmes at the Anganwari. She will report to CDPD the developments in the village requiring further attention." It is quite apparent from the aforesaid paragraphs of the scheme that the Anganwari workers should invariably belong to the same village/ward. They are to be selected by a committee of officials and non-officials at the project level. She will report to CDPD the developments in the village requiring further attention." It is quite apparent from the aforesaid paragraphs of the scheme that the Anganwari workers should invariably belong to the same village/ward. They are to be selected by a committee of officials and non-officials at the project level. The Anganwari worker may be a matriculate or a non-matriculate, only difference being that the amount of honorarium given to a matriculate is more than that given to a non-matriculate. There is nothing in the scheme to warrant the proposition that Anganwari workers must belong to any particular class, caste or tribe. The requirement is that she should be a resident of the same village where the Centre is located. 11. For the implementation of the scheme at the State/Union territory level, a Coordination Committee under the Chairmanship of the Minister incharge of the Department which is administratively responsible for the ICDS programme has been constituted. At the district level, a Co-ordination Committee under the Chairmanship of the Collector, or District Development Officer or Deputy Commissioner has been constituted. It is left to the State Government/Union Territory Administration to set up Committees at other levels. The scheme has been classified as a centrally sponsored programme to be implemented by the State Government/Union Territory Administrations with 100 percent financial assistance from the Central Government. The packing of services includes supplementary nutrition to be given to children below 6 years of age, and nursing and expectant mothers from low income families. Special attention is -required to be paid to the delivery of supplementary nutrition to children below 3 years of age. It also includes nutrition and health education to be offered to all women in the age group of 15-45 years, priority being given to nursing and expectant mothers. The scheme further provides for immunization of all children less than six years of age against small-pox, diphtheria tetanus, whooping cough, typhoid and tuberculosis : Immunization against tetanus will be done for all expectant mothers. The scheme further includes antenatal care of expectant mothers and postnatal care of nursing mothers, care of new born babies and care of all children under 6 years of age, in serious cases of malnutrition the cases have to be referred to hospitals upgraded PHCS/Community Health Services or district hospitals. The scheme further includes antenatal care of expectant mothers and postnatal care of nursing mothers, care of new born babies and care of all children under 6 years of age, in serious cases of malnutrition the cases have to be referred to hospitals upgraded PHCS/Community Health Services or district hospitals. Further, the scheme provides for imparting non-formal pre-school education in Anganwari of children between the age of 3-5 years. 12. The petitioners, therefore, heavily rely upon ICDS scheme and submit that there is nothing in the scheme which provides that the package of services offered by the scheme is meant only for children, women and expectant and nursing mothers, who belong to any particular class, caste or tribe. In fact, the emphasis is on providing such services to the entire population of eligible children and mothers under the scheme. Counsel for the State has not been able to draw our attention to any material which may justify a further classification of beneficiaries based on caste or tribe. In fact, counsel for the State submitted that it would not be possible for him to argue that the scheme is meant only for children and mothers belonging to a Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or other backward classes. We have also come to the conclusion that the scheme is not confined in its operation to any particular caste or tribe or any particular category of children and women based upon caste or tribe. The impugned decision of the State Government, as contained in Annexure-1, proceeds on the assumption that the scheme is meant only for the weaker and opperssed sections of the society, and from that it has been inferred that it is meant only for children, women and expectant and nursing mothers belonging to the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes. There is nothing in the scheme to justify this assumption. The width of the beneficial horizon of the scheme cannot be curtailed by narrow considerations of caste and tribe, when the objective is to benefit all children and all expectant and nursing mothers. We have, therefore, no doubt in holding that the decision of the State Government as contained in Annexure-1, proceeds on an erroneous assumption which is not warranted by the terms of the scheme. 13. We have, therefore, no doubt in holding that the decision of the State Government as contained in Annexure-1, proceeds on an erroneous assumption which is not warranted by the terms of the scheme. 13. The selection of the petitioners as Anganwari workers has been cancelled only on the ground that they do not belong to the "beneficiary class". We have found that the scheme does not refer to any "beneficiary class" as such. The beneficiaries under the scheme are the eligible children, women and expectant and nursing mothers. They may belong to any caste or tribe or class. The scheme does not justify the creation of a beneficiary class based upon caste or tribe or class it cannot be said that the scheme envisages that the package of services under the scheme shall not be available to a child or mother who does not belong to a Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or other backward classes. While it is true that the services offered under the scheme will mostly be availed of by persons belonging to weaker sections, including Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes, there is no justification for the assumption that others are excluded from the benefits under the scheme. The scheme seeks to provide the package of services to all children, women and expectant and nursing mothers regardless of their caste or tribe and, therefore, the Government decision creating a "beneficiary class" based upon caste or tribe is wholly unjustified and unwarranted. The cancellation of selection of the petitioners as Anganwari workers therefore, on the ground that they do not belong to such "beneficiary class" is illegal and arbitrary and must be quashed. 14. Counsel for the State submits that the petitioners are not State employees. They have only been selected to perform the duties of Anganwari workers and they received honorarium every month. Their services can be terminated at any time without disclosing any reason therefor. Under these circumstances, he submitted, the action of the respondent-State in cancelling their selection cannot be interfered with. This is not a case where the petitioners have challenged the impugned orders on the ground that they have been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice or in violation of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India. Under these circumstances, he submitted, the action of the respondent-State in cancelling their selection cannot be interfered with. This is not a case where the petitioners have challenged the impugned orders on the ground that they have been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice or in violation of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India. It may be that their selection may be cancelled at any time, but in doing so the State cannot act arbitrarily. The complain is against the arbitrary action of the State, which is not only not justified by the scheme formulated by the Central Government, but makes a distinction between citizens based on caste or tribe which is not envisaged under the Scheme. It may be that for certain purposes, on the basis of caste or tribe reservation may be made for a particular caste or tribe or class of persons, and it may be that for such purpose the State may identify the castes which may be socially and educationally backward. But, at the same time it must be kept in mind that reservation in favour of a particular class cannot be so prescribed as to amount to complete prohibition for others. If we were to accept the submission urged on behalf of the State, only a person belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes can be appointed an Anganwari worker. That would amount to hundred percent reservation as it would amount to prohibiting others for being considered for appointment as Anganwari worker. Neither the Scheme, nor any law prescribes for such total exclusion of others. In fact the scheme affirmatively provides for the inclusion of all eligible children and mothers. The action of the State Government is, therefore, arbitrary. It is not only inconsistent with the scheme envisaged by the Central Government, but it is also arbitrary inasmuch as it infringes Article 14 of the Constitution of India and seeks to discriminate between one citizen and another when there is no provision for such distinction and no basis for such classification. It is no doubt true that in locating such Centres due regard must be had to the inhabitant of the villages/wards where such Centres are located. The State Government may be justified in opening such Centres only where the dominant population is that of weaker sections of society. It is no doubt true that in locating such Centres due regard must be had to the inhabitant of the villages/wards where such Centres are located. The State Government may be justified in opening such Centres only where the dominant population is that of weaker sections of society. Such a preference may be shown in favour of villages/wards where the dominant population is of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes, but that is not to say that if there is any other child or mother or woman who is entitled to the services under the scheme, and is also eligible under the scheme, the services would be denied to them on the ground that they do not belong to a particular class, caste or tribe. The decision of the State Government is, therefore, wholly arbitrary and also discriminatory. Such action must be quashed. 15. Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders (Annexure-5 series in C.W.J.C. No. 6220/93 and Annexure-6 series in C.W.J.C. No. 7342/93) are quashed. That part of the Government decision, as contained in Annexure-1 dated 11th June, 1992, is also quashed which provides that only those females can be appointed as Anganwari workers who belong to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and other backward classes on the basis that they belong to "beneficiary class". We further declare that the ICDS scheme is not confined to its operation to children and women belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe or other backward classes. All children, women and expectant and nursing mothers are entitled to the package of services under the scheme regardless of their caste or tribe, if they are otherwise eligible. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioners to continue to work as Anganwari workers and pay to them their honorarium, including arrears of claim, from the date of cancellation of their selection in accordance with law.