JUDGMENT :

1. Feeling aggrieved with a Condition in the Circular dated 09.11.2016, issued by the State Government which deals with selection, appointment and dispensing with the engagement of Aanganwari Karyakarta, Mini Karyakarta and Helper, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

2. The petitioner has obtained a graduate’s degree in Arts and a Computer Proficiency Certificate (RS-CIT), but is yet to marry.

3. The respondents issued an advertisement dated 28.06.2019 inviting eligible candidates to apply for the posts of Aanganwadi Karyakarta/Mini Aanganwadi Karyakarta/Aanganbadi Sahayika and Asha Sahyogini.

4. The petitioner, a resident of Village Gugdi, District Barmer desirous of working on the post of Aanganwadi Karyakarta for Aanganwadi Center Gugdi (in Tehsil Balotra) approached the respondent No.4 for submitting an application form.

5. As pleaded by the petitioner, the respondent No.4 verbally told her that as she was unmarried, she was not eligible to apply for the post of Aanganwadi Karyakarta in the face of Condition No.1 of the advertisement dated 28.06.2019. And when the respondent No.4 refused to accept her application form, she sent the same on 23.07.2019 by way of speed post.

6. Immediately thereafter, on 25.07.2019, the petitioner moved this Court by way of filing the present writ petition and on 29.07.2019, a Co-ordinate Bench passed the following interim order in the instant writ petition:-

“In the meanwhile and till further orders, the respondents are directed to consider the application filed by the petitioner for appointment on the post of Aanganwadi Karyakarta pursuant to the advertisement dated 28.06.2019 for Gram Panchayatakadli, Aanganwadi Kendra – Gugdi. However, if she is selected for appointment, the order of appointment shall not be issued to her.”

7. Mr. Khileree, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Condition No.1 of the advertisement dated 28.06.2019 so also the Condition No.2(A)(ii) of the Circular dated 09.11.2016 is absolutely irrational, discriminatory and violative of fundamental rights of the unmarried candidates.

8. He submitted that no purpose can be said to be achieved by the impugned condition, which requires a female candidate to be married for being eligible for appointment.

9. Mr. Gaur, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that as the petitioner had failed to submit her application form by the last date (13.07.2019), she is not entitled for any relief.

10. In relation to the basic grievance and ground for which the petitioner has approached this Court, Mr. Gaur had nothing much to offer except that the condition requiring candidate to be married given in the Circular and the advertisement has a rationale behind it -after being engaged as Aanganwadi Worker or Helper, if a candidate gets married and shifts to her marital home (located at different place), the working of the Center where she was appointed would get hampered.

11. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

12. The impugned Condition No.2(A)(ii) of the Circular dated 09.11.2016 and Condition No.1 of the advertisement dated 28.06.2019 read thus:-

“2. (A) p;u gsrq okafNr ik=rk %&

(ii) oSokfgd fLFkfr & efgyk dk fookfgr gksuk vko';d gSA**

“1. A rFkk efgyk dk fookfgr gksuk vko';d gSA**

13. Short, yet, question of seminal importance has come up in the case at hands-‘as to whether a candidate can be discriminated or denied public employment on the ground of his/her marital status?’

14. According to this Court the discrimination which is meted out to the unmarried women on account of the offending condition cannot be countenanced. The same is ex-facie illegal, arbitrary and against the very scheme of the Constitution of India, which guarantees equality.

15. This Court is constrained to observe that an entirely new front of discrimination, which was not even envisaged or thought of by the framers of the Constitution has now been opened by the respondents by including the contentious condition in the Circular