The judgment emphasizes the necessity of a fair hearing for affected parties and the requirement for government decisions to be reasoned and transparent, especially in reservation matters.

JUDGMENT

These matters relate to the appointment of Anganwadi Workers and impels similar and interdependent contentions and are seeking reliefs either similar or opposing. I, therefore, propose to deal with all these cases together and to dispose them of through this judgment.

2. The Government of India, in the year 2006, issued an order dated 06.10.2006, reserving 25% posts of Anganwadi Workers to be filled up from amongst Anganwadi Helpers who have a minimum of 10 years satisfactory service and who possess the requisite qualifications, as laid down by the concerned State Government/Union Territory Administration. This led to the Government of Kerala to issue an order, dated 30.04.2018, enumerating the priority list of persons eligible to be appointed to the post of Anganwadi Workers.

3. Interestingly, the category of Anganwadi Helpers were not included in the priority list, presumably because they were already granted 25%

reservation by the aforementioned Government of India Order and in paragraph 4 of the list, this was so stated.

4. When appointments were made based on the Government Order dated 30.04.2018, questions arose as to how the Anganwadi Helpers had to be accommodated, because they claimed the first among the vacancies for being allotted to them. It transpires that these issues ended up before this Court in W.P(C)Nos.38244 of 2016, 12879 of 2016, 20669 of 2018, 21569 of 2018 and 1181 of 2019, which culminated in a common judgment dated 07.03.2019, wherein, a learned Judge of this Court held as under in Paragraphs 33 and 39 thereof:-

“33. As per Ext.P1, though the first priority is not maintained, the Helpers will get every 4th vacancy. Just because the Helpers were being promoted against the entire vacancies in the 25% quota, it cannot be said that Govt. cannot modify the orders, for the purpose of ensuring opportunity to all categories eligible for appointment, even while maintaining the 25% quota. Even the pleadings in the writ petitions are to the effect that one among the four vacancies should be filled up by the petitioners.

39. However, it is still open to Government to consider whether it should be the fourth vacancy or the first vacancy among the 4 to be given to the Anganwadi Helpers, so that their priority can still be maintained.”

5. As is evident from Paragraph 33 of the afore extracted judgment, it was declared that the Helpers will get every 4th vacancy, but the question whether they should be given the 1st or 4th among the block of such was left open to be decided by the Government; and the petitioners in the above mentioned writ petitions were reserved liberty to approach the competent authority for this purpose.

6. The petitioners in W.P(C)No.11305 of 2020 and W.P(C)No.9608 of 2020 have now approached this Court alleging that the Circular dated 22/2/2020 issued by the Government subsequent to the aforementioned judgment - which has been produced as Ext.P3 along with W.P(C)No.11305 of 2020 - merely states that the Anganwadi Helpers are entitled to the 4th and 8th vacancies, but without specifying why this has been so stipulated. They say that even though they had preferred representations before the Government in terms of the liberty granted to them by this Court in the aforementioned judgment, same has not been considered or have they been given an opportunity of being heard, but that the Circular dated 22.02.2020 has been issued in a mechanical fashion, merely saying that they are only entitled to the 4th, 8th and the so on vacancies. They, therefore, pray that the Circular dated 22.02.2020, namely Ext.P3 in W.P(C)No.11305 of 2020 and Ext.P3 in W.P(C)No.9608 of 2020, be set aside.

7. While so, two other sets of individuals filed W.P(C)Nos.6728 of 2020 and 12212 of 2020, challenging the aforementioned Circular of the Government dated 22.02.2020, with the primary assertion that same has been issued in complete derogation and violation of the priority turns, which were originally ordered by the Government