Read Time: 08 minutes

The Supreme Court has recently held that no distinction can be drawn between a married daughter and unmarried daughter for the purpose of considering the eligibility as per the guidelines for appointment to a post.

These observations were made by a bench of Justices R Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy in an appeal filed against the order of the Patna High Court whereby it had upheld the appointment of the respondent for the post of Anganwadi Sevika which was alleged to be the in contravention to the applicable guidelines.

In 2006, an advertisement was issued by the Mukhiya / Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Mirapur (Kumrapakar) Panchayat, inviting applications for appointment of Anganwadi Sevika in Panchayat Centre No.43/09. For this purpose, a merit list was prepared in which 9th Respondent was placed at Serial No.01 and the appellant was at Serial No.02.

Appointments of Anganwadi Sevikas, during the relevant time, was governed by guidelines issued in the shape of a policy contained in Margdarshika – 2006.

Clause 3 of the guidelines deals with the qualifications / conditions for selection to the post of Anganwadi Sevika. The relevant guidelines for the purpose of this appeal in Clause 3(E) read as under:

“3.Qualifications / Conditions for selection of Anganwadi Sevikain:

A. ... ... ...
B. ... ... ...
C. ... ... ...
D. ... ... ...
E. Public Servant, Head, Member of Panchayat Samiti / Ward Member / Member of District Council, etc., themselves or their relatives, sellers of the various public articles (such as Public Distribution System vendor, Mobile Kerosene Oil Dealer, Inter-Departmental post office employee, etc.) relatives such as daughter / wife / daughter-in-law of the Govt. and semi–govt. Servants, will not be selected for this post.”

The appellant told the Court  that the father of Respondent No.9 was a government servant and was serving as teacher in a government school, as such, the Respondent was not eligible for appointment in view of Clause 3 of the Guidelines.

On the other hand, the Respondent argued that she was the married daughter of a government servant and her matrimonial home is in the district of Muzaffarpur, whereas, her paternal home is situated in the district of Vaishali.

"From a reading of Clause 3 of the guidelines, it is clear that relatives such as daughter/wife/daughter-in-law of the government servant is ineligible for appointment as Anganwadi Sevika. The learned Single Judge has interpreted Clause 3 of the guidelines and held that the said guidelines are to be applied only for unmarried daughters.", remarked the Bench.

The Court found such interpretation to run contrary to Clause 3 of the guidelines.

Accordingly the Court said,

"For the purpose of considering the eligibility the guideline as indicated under sub-clause (E) is to be construed as it reads. No distinction can be drawn between a married daughter and unmarried daughter for the purpose of considering the eligibility as per the guidelines."

"It is quite common in rural areas, the paternal home and maternal home may be in the same village sometimes. When the criteria is notified in the guidelines such guidelines have to be interpreted as it is without deviating the same keeping in mind the facts of a particular case...", further said the Court.

It was further brought to the Court's notice Clause 3(E) was struck down subsequently by the High Court, but since the selection relates to the year 2006, it held that no direction could be granted to appoint the appellant, and selections were to be made by issuing fresh notification.

"It is made clear that the appellant and 9th Respondent are not precluded for applying pursuant to fresh notification. If they apply, their claims also be considered along with other candidates. Till such fresh notification is issued and selections are made, 9 th Respondent is entitled to continue as Anganwadi Sevika", clarified that the Court.

Cause Title: Kumari Rekha Bharati v. The State of Bihar & Ors.