Constitution of India, Article 14, 226 – Anganwari Sevika Guidelines, 2011, Clause 4.9 – Service Law – Appointment – Anganwari Workers/Sevika – Appellant who was appointed has secured 80.60, whereas respondent No. 8 has secured 48.60 mark – Clause 4.9 of the 2011 Guidelines imposed a restriction on such persons whose family member or members have secured appointment with the State Government or any organization of the State – Only ground on which the appellant was held to be disqualified was that her father was a Panchayat Teacher and he was drawing a salary of Rs.6,000/- per month – Only ground on which the appellant has been non-suited was that the appellant had not challenged the said Clause 4.9 of the 2011 Guidelines before the High Court–Held that when the said Clause 4.9 of the 2011 Guidelines was struck down by the High Court vide judgment dated 27thSeptember 2022, it ceased to exist – As such, it was not-necessary for the appellant to challenge the validity of the same inasmuch as the same was already held to be invalid by the very same High Court – Judgments and orders passed by the learned Single-Judge as well as the Division Bench held to be not sustainable in law and liable to be set aside -Writ petition as well as the appeal filed by the appellant before the High Court allowed by setting aside the order passed by the Appellate Authority – Appellant directed to be reinstated forthwith – Directed that though the appellant would not be entitled to wages for the period during which she was out of employment, she would be entitled to continuity in service for all other purposes. (Para 9 to 12)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2024 STPL(Web) 38 SC
[2024 INSC 40 = JT 2024 (1) SC 264]
Anjum Ara Vs. State Of Bihar And Others
Civil Appeal No. 208 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 2233 of 2023)-Decided on 8-1-2024
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2024-STPL_Web_-38-SC.pdf
