IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE, JJ.
State of West Bengal & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Papiya Ghosal (Maity) & Ors. - Respondents
MAT 493 of 2024 With MAT 509 of 2024, CAN 6 of 2024, CAN 7 of 2024
Decided on : 24-01-2025
JUDGMENT :
Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.
1. Both the appeals, preferred at the behest of the State of West Bengal and its functionaries, arise from a common order dated September 19, 2023, delivered by the learned single Bench in two writ petitions being WPA 6322 of 2024 (Kabita Samanta vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) and WPA 22212 of 2022 (Papiya Ghoshal (Maity) vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.), which were heard analogously. For having thematic coherence, both appeals were heard together.
2. Prior to venturing to delve into the contentious issue involved in the appeal, it is prudent to outline the key facts that led to these appeals, which are as follows:
b) In pursuit of that objective, a selection process was initiated for the recruitment of 2,954 posts of Supervisor (female-only) under the ICDS, 2019 in the Department of Women and Child Development & Social Welfare, Government of West Bengal. Through an advertisement bearing No. 08 of 2019, applications were invited from eligible candidates for the aforementioned posts.
c) Meanwhile, by a letter dated March 8, 2019, the Director instructed the eligible and willing Anganwadi Workers (in short, AWW) to submit their applications for the posts online by April 15, 2019. In response to the letter dated March 8, 2019, the writ petitioners/respondents, all of whom are Anganwadi Workers (AWWs), offered their candidatures for the post and participated in the examinations held on October 30, 2021, and October 31, 2021.
d) Subsequently, the AWWs filed two separate writ petitions, namely WPA 6322 of 2022 and WPA 22212 of 2022, praying for an order to annul the memorandum dated March 7, 2019. They also prayed for order restraining the respondents from giving effect to the results of the examinations held on October 30, 2021, and October 31, 2021, as well as a stay on the entire recruitment process.
e) The main grievances of the writ petitioners/respondents, as articulated in the two writ petitions, are that the Ministry of Women & Child Development, Government of India, through its memorandum No. 1-2/2014-CD.1 dated 15th September 2015, in supersession of all earlier guidelines, issued new guidelines regarding the filling of vacancies for the post of Supervisor. According to these new guidelines, 50% of the vacancies for the post of Supervisor would be filled by promotion from amongst Anganwadi Workers (AWWs) with at least 10 years of experience as AWWs and the prescribed qualifications, as per the Recruitment Rules for the post of Supervisor. In the event of a shortage of eligible candidates, the vacancies would be filled by direct recruitment. The remaining 50% of the vacancies would be filled through direct recruitment.
f) However, through a memorandum dated 7th March 2019, the Joint Secretary to the Department of Women and Child Development and Social Welfare stated that, out of a total of 3,376 vacancies for the post of Supervisor, the Cabinet decided to fill 422 p
Anupal Singh & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Gridco Limited & Anr. vs. Sadananda Doloi & Ors.
Managing Committee, Kadamtala High Madrasah vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.
P. Mahendran & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Punjab State Electricity Board Ltd. Vs. Zora Singh & Ors.
Rai Sudhir Prasad vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. vs. Raj Kumar & Ors.
The State must adhere to central guidelines mandating a 50%:50% ratio for filling Supervisor vacancies under ICDS, rejecting any conflicting state rules.
No vested right to promotion under repealed rules post-cadre merger; vacancies filled per rules in force at DPC consideration date. Backlog vacancies carried forward treated under new 70:30 direct-pr....
Anganwadi Workers selected for Supervisor posts are entitled to substantive appointments and benefits retroactively from their initial engagement date, regardless of contractual arrangements.
The right for promotion has to be considered only in the light of the existing rules in force on the date of consideration to the next level of promotion.
The court upheld the authority of the State to adjust recruitment vacancies, emphasizing the proper application of statutory rules regarding 'year of recruitment' and ensuring adherence to constituti....
The court upheld the principle that recruitment vacancies must be determined based solely on existing vacancies for the recruitment year, excluding anticipated future vacancies per statutory rules.
The State/respondents have spectacularly failed to give any reason for appointing the candidates from the second list and not from the first list who had a reasonable expectation to be appointed. Fur....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.