Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 154 (TRI)

Dalu Majumder v. State of Tripura

2022-03-25

S.TALAPATRA

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. All the above mentioned writ petitions are combined for disposal by a common judgment as in all these writ petitions a common relief has been sought and such relief has been claimed to have been covered by previous decisions of this court. 2. In these writ petitions, the petitioners, Anganwadi Workers (AWWs)/Anganwadi Helpers (AWHs) have challenged a few notifications and memoranda. Those are mostly common in all the writ petitions. For brevity, a catalogue of those notifications and memoranda are placed hereunder: 1. Notification No.46 (176) - ICDS/SWE/2012/1557(94) dated 07.07.2012 issued by the respondent No.2. 2. Memorandum No. F.46(54)-ICDS/SWE/2015/7780(69) dated 15.05.2015 issued by the respondent No.3 whereby the age of disengagement of Anganwadi Workers and Angangwadi Helpers has been fixed on completion of 60 years. 3. Memorandum No. F.1(6)-CDPO/MNP/15/390(4) dated 30.10.2021 issued by the respondent No.6 or the memorandum of like nature directing the petitioners to handover the complete charge to the Anganwadi Workers or Helpers on or before a certain date. 3. The writ petitioners are working under the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) as Anganwadi Worker or Anganwadi Helper in the State of Tripura. By the memorandum dated 15.05.2015, the maximum age of disengagement has been fixed at 60 years. On that ground, a few Anganwadi Workers or Anganwadi Helpers have been disengaged or terminated from their services for their attaining 60 years of age, in gross violation of the memorandum of the Government of India, as it is evident from the communication dated 19.07.2017 issued by the Ministry of Women & Child Development, Government of India under No.21-1/2017-CD.1 that as per the restructured 3rd phase of ICDS, the existing guidelines do not provide a uniform age limit for retirement of Anganwadi Workers. Rather to determine the maximum age limit, the task has been left to the State Governments. It has also been communicated that the maximum age limit of 65 years for Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers has been supported by most of the State Governments at various forums. In view of the above, a uniform policy decision would be undertaken to discontinue the services of Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers at the age of 65 years. 4. It has also been communicated that the maximum age limit of 65 years for Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers has been supported by most of the State Governments at various forums. In view of the above, a uniform policy decision would be undertaken to discontinue the services of Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers at the age of 65 years. 4. But contrary to the central policy, by the notification under No.46(176)-ICDS/SWE/2012/1557(94) dated 07.07.2012, the Government of Tripura published its decision by fixing the upper/maximum age limit of Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers under the Education (SW&SE) Department, who were honorarium based workers, at the age of 60 years with immediate effect and until further orders. By the memorandum dated 15.05.2015, as referred above, all the CDPOs have been instructed to take follow up action for disengaging the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers who have attained 60 years of age. Accordingly, those Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers, including the petitioners, received the memorandum on diverse dates issued by the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO) in respect of their disengagement and for handing over the charge, whatsoever is lying with them. 5. The petitioners are all similarly circumstanced and by means of these writ petitions they have urged this court for setting aside the Notification dated 07.07.2012 and Memorandum dated 15.05.2015 and other consequential memoranda directing the petitioners to handover the charge for their attaining the age of 60 years. 6. It has been further urged that the petitioners being the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers be allowed to continue in their services till they attained 65 years of age. Till then, the petitioners should not be terminated to the serious detriment of their livelihood. 7. By filing the reply in some of the cases, the respondents have stated that the Ministry of Women and Child Development has provided a broad framework which is not to be mandatorily followed by the State Governments. The State governments can fix the maximum age for the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers for their final disengagement. Accordingly, the Government of Tripura has fixed the maximum age limit at 65 years. 8. Mr. R Datta, learned counsel who appears for the petitioners has categorically stated that the question is no more res integra. The State governments can fix the maximum age for the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers for their final disengagement. Accordingly, the Government of Tripura has fixed the maximum age limit at 65 years. 8. Mr. R Datta, learned counsel who appears for the petitioners has categorically stated that the question is no more res integra. Several writ petitions had been filed and this court has declared that the maximum age for disengagement for the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers will be 65 years. Even some of those decisions, in this regard, have been challenged in intra-court appeals. The direction in respect of allowing the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers to continue till 65 years of age has been further consolidated by the decisions of this court while disposing the writ appeals. 9. Mr. Datta, learned counsel has, out of the several decisions, referred a decision of this court in Rina Purakayastha v. State of Tripura & Ors [the common judgment dated 10.03.2021 delivered in WP(C)886/2019]. Along with that case, several other analogous cases were decided. The State of Tripura and the other respondents challenged the said decision in Rina Purakayastha (supra) for setting aside the direction upon the Government of India to take uniform decision on the maximum age for final disengagement or retirement of the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers. In Rina Purakayastha (supra) it had been observed that having followed the policy of the Union of India, the Government of West Bengal has decided that the age of disengagement of Anganwadi Workders (AWWs) and Anganwadi Helpers (AWHs) will be 65 years of age. This information can be availed from the communication dated 20.09.2018. 10. But the Government of Tripura has not accepted the maximum age limit of 65 years, even though by the memorandum dated 22.10.2012 the Government of India had proposed the maximum age for disengagement of Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers to be 65 years of age. 11. In that background, it was directed that since the Government of India is on their process to take a uniform policy, the appropriate policy in that regard should be taken by prescribing a uniform age of disengagement in all states and UTs. The state government should review their decision in terms of the communication dated 22.10.2012. 11. In that background, it was directed that since the Government of India is on their process to take a uniform policy, the appropriate policy in that regard should be taken by prescribing a uniform age of disengagement in all states and UTs. The state government should review their decision in terms of the communication dated 22.10.2012. It was further directed that Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers shall be allowed to continue in the services even after they had crossed 60 years of age till such policy is finalized. 12. The said order was challenged in the writ appeal being WA 173/2021 [State of Tripura & Ors. v. Rina Puraakaystha]. By the judgment dated 29.06.2021 the said writ appeal was disposed of on observing as follows: 'As noted, 90% of the expenditure is covered by the Central Government funding. The State contributes barely 10%. Secondly, whether a person retires at the age of 60 years or 65 years, we do not see how it fundamentally changes the expenditure burden of the Government. If an employee retires at the age of 60 years, there would be an earlier need for replacement. If the same person continues till the age of 65 years, the requirement of engaging a new person to substitute him or her would be delayed by that period. The service is not pensionable and thus, there is no question of the pensionable service being higher with higher retirement age leading to greater pension liability for the State Government. In any view of the matter, without there being strong reasons cited by the State Government, it would not be possible for the State authorities to discard and disregard the Government of India guidelines for implementation of the scheme since 90% of the funding comes from the Government of India coffers. Age of retirement of the employees engaged in the scheme is essential part of implementation of the scheme. In the result, appeals are dismissed.' 13. Following those decisions, several writ petitions which were filed by the similarly circumstanced Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers have been disposed of. It has been stated at the Bar that the said decision of the writ appellate court has not been challenged by the State and that decision has reached its finality. 14. Mr. Following those decisions, several writ petitions which were filed by the similarly circumstanced Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers have been disposed of. It has been stated at the Bar that the said decision of the writ appellate court has not been challenged by the State and that decision has reached its finality. 14. Mr. R Datta, learned counsel has submitted that this batch of writ petitions is squarely covered by the judgment dated 29.06.2021 delivered in WA 173/2021 [State of Tripura & Ors. v. Rina Puraakaystha] along with other analogous writ appeals. 15. Mr. DC Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in WP(C) 692/2021 (Jamuna Ghosh v. State of Tripura & Ors.) has pointed out that the petitioner has already been disengaged on 31.01.2021. The said writ petition has been filed on 23.09.2021. As such, the said writ petition stands apart from this batch. 16. This court has given its anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of these writ petitions, as borne in the records, and have appreciated the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and is of the opinion that these writ petitions are covered by the decision in WA 173/2021 [State of Tripura & Ors. v. Rina Puraakaystha]. So far WP(C) 692/2021 (Jamuna Ghosh v. State of Tripura & Ors.) is concerned, it is true that the writ petition was filed on 23.09.2021 whereas the writ petitioner was disengaged w.e.f. 31.01.2021. But, the question whether the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers should be allowed to continue till they attained the age of 65 years, is common to all the writ petitions. The answer must be in the affirmative, in view of the decision in Rina Purakayastha (supra). 17. The impugned notification and memoranda, as noted above, and similar notifications & memoranda whereby the maximum age of disengagement of the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers has been made 60 years are interfered with and set aside. 18. As corollary, the respondents are directed to allow all the petitioners, except the petitioner in WP(C) 692/2021, to continue their service as Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers till they attained the age of 65 years. So far as the petitioner in WP(C) 692/2021 is concerned, she shall be called to serve the remaining years out of the maximum age of 65 years. She shall be called forthwith, by any means, not beyond 15.04.2022. 19. So far as the petitioner in WP(C) 692/2021 is concerned, she shall be called to serve the remaining years out of the maximum age of 65 years. She shall be called forthwith, by any means, not beyond 15.04.2022. 19. With the aforesaid observations and directions, these writ petitions are allowed and disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.