2026 INSC 242 Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos…..…of 2026 [@Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.29192-29195 of 2024]

Shiny C.J. & Ors.

...Appellants Versus Shalini Sreenivasan & Ors. Etc.

...Respondents W I T H Civil Appeal Nos…..…of 2026 [@Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.1148-1149 of 2025]

Civil Appeal No…..…of 2026 [@Special Leave Petition (C) No.1791 of 2025 Civil Appeal No…..…of 2026 [@Special Leave Petition (C) No.3973 of 2026]

J U D G M E N T

K. Vinod Chandran, J.

Leave granted.

2. Whether Anganwadi Workers having a Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC) with 10 years’ experience, by reason of having possessed or obtained a Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by b D a a b te it : a 2 p 0 a 2 n 6 d .0 e 3 y .16 graduate degree; in their eligibility to apply for vacancies Reason:

of Supervisors in the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) should be confined to the 11% earmarked for graduates? Whether by such earmarking of vacancies for graduates are they excluded from applying under the 29% vacancies available to Anganwadi Workers holding an SSLC certificate and 10 years’ experience, for reason only of possessing a higher qualification?

3. Sri. Huzefa Ahmadi, learned Senior Counsel, led the arguments for the appellants and first took us to the rule position as it existed prior to 2013 and after the amendment, applicable from 01.01.2014. It is pointed out that the specific ratio carved out for the graduates amongst the Anganwadi Workers was from the ratio earlier kept apart for direct recruitment from graduates. This does not exclude the graduate Anganwadi Workers who have the requisite experience from applying in the 29% quota which they were always entitled to. Any interpretation otherwise would be discounting the efforts undertaken to obtain a higher qualification. The Anganwadi Workers when they are appointed as Supervisor ICDS resign from their earlier appointment and takes up the services under the ICDS. Many of the graduate Anganwadi Workers appointed in the subject selection have thus resigned and face the prospect of losing their livelihood totally, if the impugned judgment, with a wrong interpretation, is upheld.

4. We were also taken through the decisions of the Administrative Tribunal and the High Court, the first of which rejected the claim of the petitioners, the respondents herein, who were Anganwadi Workers with the qualification of SSLC alone and 10 years’ experience, for multiple reasons. First it was found that they had applied under the notification without demur and on their failure to get selected, challenged the inclusion of graduates. Then, it was held that the appellants did not take any effort to implead the affected parties; only 10 out of the many selected having been impleaded. The Tribunal also went into the merits and interpreted the rule correctly to find no exclusion of the graduates in applying under the notification.

5. We were also taken through the counter affidavit of the Government to indicate the intention behind providing for 11% quota, which never contemplated exclusion of graduates in the 29% quota. The counter affidavit of the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) was also read over to us to bring out the selection procedure, and it was emphasized that out of the 317 persons appointed only 82 were degree holders. There can be no prejudice found in reality, as the figures would disclose, which has also been emphasized by KPSC in its counter. The interpretation by the High Court is in the teeth of the rule, which provided only a ratio and not a quota as understood by the High Court. 6. Sri. Nikhil Goel, learned Senior Counsel appearing for some of the appellants took us through the notification which specified the experience, the qualification and the rule applicable in no uncertain terms. The merit list published by the KPSC is also put forth to demonstrate that there was no weightage given to graduates. Sri. Sarath S Jana