Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1323 (GAU)

Shakira Khanom v. State of Assam

2018-09-07

NELSON SAILO

body2018
JUDGMENT : NELSON SAILO, J. 1. Heard Mr. S Banik, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N Goswami , the learned State counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 6. None appears for the respondent No.7 despite notice. 2. This is the second time the petitioner is before this Court. The earlier writ petition being WP (C) No. 2081 of 2015 was disposed of on 14.03.2016, with a direction to the Director of Social Welfare Department, Government of Assam (respondent No.2) to cause an enquiry on the dispute raised regarding the residential status of the private respondent. On conducting such enquiry, it was directed that the parties be heard and thereafter, the respondent No. 2 should pass appropriate orders within a time frame of 3(three) months. It was also directed that till the conclusion of the enquiry, no appointment should be given to the private respondent. 3. However, despite such direction, the respondent No. 7 was appointed as Anganwadi Worker before the enquiry as directed, was completed and therefore, the petitioner is again before this Court. 4. Be it stated herein, that the dispute raised by the petitioner is with regard to the appointment of respondent No.7, as Anganwadi Worker in 165 No. Eraligool (Ahmedpur) Anganwadi Centre under the Patharkandi ICDS project in the district of Karimganj. This Court on 24.03.2017, while issuing notice of motion, returnable by 6(six) weeks had passed an interim order to the effect that the State respondents will ensure that the order passed by this Court on 14.03.2016 in WP (C) No. 2081 of 2015, restraining the appointment of the private respondent should be complied with. 5. The learned State counsel Mr. N Goswami submits that the enquiry as was directed by this Court has been concluded with a report submitted by the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO) concerned to the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, attached to the Directorate of Social Welfare, Assam. He also submits that the respondent No. 7 tendered her resignation on 06.04.2018 from the post of Anganwadi Worker, which she was holding. The learned State Counsel further submits that as per the report of the CDPO, both the petitioner as well as the reosndent No. 7 are residents of the Anganwadi centre area concerned. 6. He also submits that the respondent No. 7 tendered her resignation on 06.04.2018 from the post of Anganwadi Worker, which she was holding. The learned State Counsel further submits that as per the report of the CDPO, both the petitioner as well as the reosndent No. 7 are residents of the Anganwadi centre area concerned. 6. On perusal of the direction passed by this Court on 14.03.2016, it is noticed that a specific direction was issued not to appoint the respondent No. 5 therein and who is the respondent No. 7 in the present case as Anganwadi Worker against the Centre concerned pending finalization of the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent No.2. However, as per the instructions received by the learned State counsel, the respondent No.7 was functioning as Anganwadi Worker till she submitted her resignation on 06.04.2018. It is therefore seen that the direction passed by this Court has been ignored which will invite drawing of contempt proceeding against the person responsible. However, considering the fact that respondent No. 7 resigned from her post on 06.04.2018 and at the same time keeping in view the interest of the community residing in the Anganwadi Centre area concerned, this Court refrains from entering into that aspect of the matter. As the post of Anganwadi Worker in 165 No. Eraligool (Ahmedpur) Anganwadi Centre is lying vacant after the resignation of the respondent No.7, the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent Nos. 2 and 6 will be required to undertake the process of filling up of the post as expeditiously as possible. 7. Accordingly, the respondent Nos. 2 and 6 are directed to fill up the posts of Anganwadi Worker in 165 No. Eraligool (Ahmedpur) Anganwadi Centre as per the relevant guidelines. The same should be initiated and completed within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 8. Considering the time required for conclusion of the selection process and having regard to the fact that the petitioner was working as Anganwadi Worker on temporary basis since 2008, till the respondent No.7 came into the picture, the respondent authorities will be at liberty to utilize the services of the petitioner in the said Centre pending finalization of the selection process as directed. 9. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.