N THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
KARDAK ETE, J.
Hiren Ch. Das, S/o. Lt. Tarun Ch. Das and Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Assam, Rep. By The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Assam and Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No.6683 Of 2017
Decided On : 05-11-2024
Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) - Contractual Employment - The petitioners, appointed as Child Development Project Officers (CDPOs) on a contractual basis, sought parity in pay with regular CDPOs and regularization of their services. The court noted the disparity in pay between contractual and regular CDPOs, with the former earning Rs.20,000/- compared to Rs.45,000/- for the latter. The court emphasized that the petitioners had been appointed through a proper selection process and had been performing identical duties. The court referred to the Supreme Court's decisions in Uma Devi and others, indicating that while there is no indefeasible right to regularization, the state may frame a scheme for regularization as a one-time measure. The court directed the authorities to consider framing such a scheme and to pay the petitioners' arrears and current salaries. (Paras 2, 8, 12, 35, 36)
JUDGMENT :
(Kardak Ete, J.)
Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. J. Patowary, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned State counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4 and 6 and Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing counsel, Finance Department, appearing for the respondent No.5.
2. By instituting this writ petition, the petitioners, who have been appointed as Child Development Project Officers (CDPOs in short) on contractual basis, have prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioners for parity in pay with regular CDPOs and for a direction to frame a scheme for regularization of the service of the petitioners as CDPOs. The petitioners have also prayed for payment of arrears as well as the current salary of the petitioners.
3. The case of the petitioners, in nutshell, is that they are working as CDPOs under Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS in short) and posted in different parts of the State of Assam. The petitioners were appointed pursuant to the advertisement dated 09.01.2010 on contractual basis, initially for a period of one year and their services have been extended from time to time.
4. The ICDS Programme was launched on 02.10.1975. It is a centrally sponsored social welfare scheme for addressing health and malnutrition issues. The programme aims to improve the health, nutrition and education of children under six years of age, pregnant and lactating mothers and women of 16-44 years of age living in urban and rural background and tribal areas of the country. The CDPO is a key functionary of the scheme under ICDS. The CDPO is responsible for organization of service and also for determination and implementation of ICDS scheme at the field level. The post of CDPO is a gazetted post and the Central Government bears 90% of the expenditure for payment of salaries of CDPOs and rest 10% is borne by the State Government.
5. The Assam Social Welfare (Recruitment and Promotion) Service Order, 1994, provides that 60% post of CDPO in Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Assam is required to be filled up by direct recruitment and the rest 40% by way of promotion from the feeder cadre. There are 230 numbers of ICDS project in the State of Assam. In the year 2009-10, schemes were received by the Govt. of Assam for implementation of many new ICDS projects within a time frame, failing which, the posts would lapse. However, due to paucity of time and also considering the exigency, it was decided by the Government in the Social Welfare Department to appoint CDPOs on contractual basis as such, the department has advertised inviting application from eligible candidates having requisite qualification for filling up the posts of CDPO on contractual basis for a period of one year. The advertisement reflects for filling up of 9 (nine) posts of CDPOs, but also stipulated that the number of posts may go up. Accordingly, the petitioners were appointed after due selection process.
6. The aforesaid advertisement was put to challenge before this Court in WP(C) 2772/2010 filed by some officials of the department alleging that such advertisement would adversely effect their promotional avenue. This Court by the judgment and order dated 15.11.2010 disposed of the writ petition by negating the contention of the petitioners therein and allowing the authorities to go ahead with the selection process. The department, thereafter, conducted the selection process by increasing the number of posts from 9 to 22, wherein, total 22 candidates including the petitioners were appointed as CDPOs.
7. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that on being satisfied that the service rendered by the petitioner and on successful implementation of various schemes under ICDS project, the services of the petitioners have been continued and extended from time to time and their fixed pay of Rs.10,000/-has been enhanced to Rs.20,000/-.
B.?. Nagarajan vs. State of Karnataka reported in (1979) 4 SCC 507
Somesh Thapliyal and another -vs-Vice Chancellor, H.N.B. Garhwal University and Another
State of Jammu and Kashmir and Others -vs-District Bar Association, Bandipora
Amarendra Kumar Mohapatra -vs-State of Orissa and Others reported in (2014) 4 SCC 583
Narendra Kumar Tiwari and others -vs-State of Jharkhand and Others
Secretary, State of Karnataka -vs- Uma Devi (3)
Secy. State of Karnataka and Another -vs-Uma Devi and Another reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1.
State of Manipur and Another -vs-Ksh. Moirangninthou Singh and others reported in (2007) 10 SCC 544
State of Karnataka and others -vs-M.L. Kesari and others reported in (2010) 9 SCC 247
AI
The court recognized the disparity in pay between contractual and regular Child Development Project Officers, allowing for potential regularization of services as a one-time measure while emphasizing....
Long service on a contractual basis does not confer a right to regularization or equal pay as per established legal principles.
The court ruled that contract employees with over ten years of service against sanctioned posts are entitled to regularization, emphasizing the need for fair recruitment processes and age relaxation ....
Temporary, contractual, casual or daily wage employees do not have a legal right to be made permanent, unless they have been appointed in terms of relevant Rules or in adherence to Article 14 & 16 of....
The court emphasized that long uninterrupted service in governmental roles, despite initial irregular appointments, warrants consideration for regularization in accordance with established legal prec....
The Tribunal acknowledged the claim for regularization based on long service but deferred the decision pending similar ongoing Supreme Court cases.
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.