HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Writ Appeal No 104 of 2007
Kaushliya Bai
...Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh
2. Collector, Kabeerdham
3. Additional,Collector
4. District Child and Women
5. Project Officer
6. Janpad Panchayat
7. Gram Panchayat
8. Shantosh Yadav
...Respondents
! Mr Rajeev Shrivastava, Counsel for the appellant
^ Mr Praveen Das, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents 1 to 5
Mr. Bharat Rajput, Counsel for respondent No 8
None for respondents No 6 & 7
Honble Shri Rajeev Gupta,J,Honble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha
Dated:20/04/2009
: Judgment
(Writ Appeal under Section 2 Sub-Section (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court(Appeal to Division Bench) Act,2006
ORDER
(20.04.2009)
Following order of the Court was
delivered by
Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.
(1) Being aggrieved with the order dated 2.2.2007 passed
in W.P.(S) No. 645/2007 by the learned Single Judge of this
Court, the appellant/petitioner has filed this Writ Appeal.
The following questions are raised for consideration of
this Court:
(i) Whether the basic qualification, subject to
certain relaxations, for appointment to the
post of Anganbadi Workers contained in the
scheme are `essential’ or `desirable’ ?
(ii) Whether the word `desirable’ used in the
scheme has to be read as `essential’ for
the purpose of scheme ?
(2) Facts briefly stated are as under:-
The appellant/petitioner was appointed as Anganbadi
Worker in Gram Panchayat Amaldiha, Village Barejahapara,
Tahsil Pandariya, District Kabeerdham on 8.11.2006. Her
appointment was challenged by respondent No.8 on the ground
that the appellant had passed 7th Class Certificate
Examination, whereas, respondent No. 8 had passed 8th Class
Certificate Examination; both were the local candidates,
therefore, the preference had to be given to respondent No.
8. The Additional Collector, Kabeerdham after due inquiry,
cancelled the appointment of the appellant vide order dated
26.12.2006 (Annexure-P/5 in the Writ Petition) holding that
respondent No.8 was 8th passed, therefore, she was more
suitable and she should be appointed as Anganbadi Worker of
the concerned village in Gram Panchayat. The said order was
challenged by the appellant in Writ Petition (S) No.
645/2007. The learned Single Judge took the view that
according to the scheme for appointment of Anganbadi
Worker, 8th Class passed is an essential basic
qualification and the preference comes thereafter. In case,
8th Class passed candidate is not available, the candidate
having lessor qualification may be considered. Taking such
view the Writ Petition was dismissed by the impugned order
dated 2nd February, 2007, which has been challenged in this
appeal.
(3) Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant, would submit that the educational
qualification is a “desirable” qualification and not
“essential qualification”, therefore, the Additional
Collector as well as the learned Single Judge erred in law
in holding that the appointment of the appellant/petitioner
was bad.
(4) On the other hand, Mr. Praveen Das, learned Dy. Govt.
Advocate appearing on behalf of the State/respondents 1 to
5 and Mr. Bharat Rajput, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of respondent No.8, opposed these arguments and
supported the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
(5) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at
length and have also perused the records of the Writ Appeal
as also the Writ Petition.
(6) A copy of Part-A of the scheme, showing qualifications
for appointment to the post of Anganbadi Workers has been
filed as Annexure P/1 in the Writ Petition. It reads as
under:-
“aAA vkaxuckM+h dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk dh fu;qfDr gsrq
vgZrk;sa AA
AvA vkaxuckM+h dk;ZdrkZ &
vkaxuckM+h dk;ZdrkZ ,d efgyk ,18 ls 44 o”kZ dh
vk;q+ ekulsoh dk;ZdrkZ gksxh A esfV&d ikl dk;ZdrkZvksa
dks :Ik;s 1000@& rFkk ukWu esfV&d dks :Ik;s 938@& izfr
ekg eku ns; fn;k tk;sxk A muds p;u esa fuEu fcUnqvksa
dk fo’ks”k /;ku fn;k tk;s A,1+ vkaxuckM+h dk;ZdrkZ mlh xzke@uxj dh fuoklh ,oa
xzke iapk;r uxj dh fuokZpd lwph esa ntZ ernkrk
gksuh pkfg, ftls xzke@uxj esa vkaxuckM+h [kksyh
tkuh izLrkfor gS] fdlh Hkh fLFkfr esa ml xzke@uxj
ds ckgj efgyk dks dk;ZdrkZ ds :Ik esa u j[kk tk;s
A,2+ vkaxuckM+h dk;ZdrkZvksa ds fy, p;fur dh tkus okyh
efgyk LFkkuh; leqnk;ksa dks Lohdk;Z gks rFkk
mlesa usr`Ro iznku djus dh {kerk gks] rkfd og
efgyk e.My dk xBu dj xfrfof/k;ksa dk fdz;kUo;u
Bhd <ax ls dj lds A,3+ dksbZ ljdkjh deZpkjh vFkok iapk;rh jkt
laLFkkvksa@uxjh; fudk; ds fuokZfpr vFkok euksuhr
lnL; vFkok muds lxs laca/kh dh vkaxuckM+h
dk;ZdrkZ fu;qDr ugha fd;k tk ldsxk A ;fn fdlh
iapk;r inkf/kdkfj;ka ds }kjk vius fj'rsnkj dh
fu;qfDr dh vuq'kalk dh tkrh gS vFkok fu;qfDr dh
tkrh gS rks og inkf/kdkjh iapk;r esa ml in ds
fy, Lor% fMLDokyhQkbZ ,v;ksX;+ gks tk;sxk A,4+ vkfne tkfr dY;k.k foHkkx }kjk lapkfyr `kkykvksa]
fo'ks"kdj vkJe `kkykvksa esa mRrh.kZ gksus okyh
,oa fu/kkZfjr vgZrk j[kus okyh vuqlwfpr
tkfr@vuqlwfpr tutkfr dh efgykvksa dh muds xzke dh
vkaxuckM+h esa dk;ZdrkZ@lgkf;dk ds fjDr inksa ij
fu;qfDr esa izkFkfedrk nh tk;sa A,5+ fu;wfDr esa fo/kok@ifjR;Drk efgykvksa dks
loksZPPk izkFkfedrk nh tk;s rnksijkar fuEu ifjokj
fd efgykvksa dh izkFkfedrk nh tk;s &,v+ xjhch js[kk ds uhps thou ;kiu djus okys
ifjokj A,c+ vuqlwfpr tkfr@vuqlwfpr tu tkfr ds ifjokj A
,6+ D;kssafd vkaxuckM+h dk;ZdrkZ dks bl ;kstuk ds
varxZr fofHkUUk lsok;sa iznku djus dk nkf;Ro gS]
o blds fy, mUgsa dkQh fjdkMZ j[kuk gksrk gS A vr%
;g okaNuh; gS fd dk;ZdrkZ esfV&d gks A ;fn ;g
laHko u gks rks fefMy ikl efgyk dh fu;qfDr dh
tk;s o ;fn og Hkh miyC/k u gks rks ml xzke dh de
inkj efgyk dh fu;qfDr dh tk;s
fdUrq vuinkj efgyk dh Hkh
fu;qfDr dh tk ldrh gS A ,slh fLFkfr esa i`Fkd ls
fdlh f’kf{kr O;fDr ls vko’;d fjdkMZ la/kkfjr
djk;k tkuk vko’;d gksxk] fdUrq bl ifjfLFkfr esa
,sls O;fDr dks bl dk;Z ds fy, jkf’k dk Hkqxrku
dk;ZdrkZ dks fn;s ekuns; esa ls dVkSrh fd;k tk
ldsxk o mUgsa i`Fkd ls dksbZ jkf’k ns; ugha gksxh
A,7+ uxjh; {ks=ksa esa vkaxuckM+h dk;ZdrkZ esfV&dqysV
gksuk vfuok;Z gS A ”
(7) A perusal of the relevant provisions of scheme would
show that matric passed is an essential qualification for
the Anganbadi Workers to be appointed in urban area. For
the other area, it has been provided that firstly matric
passed candidate should be appointed and if it is not
possible, then, the middle passed candidate should be given
appointment and if such candidate is also not available,
then, intelligent candidate belonging to same village
having some lessor qualification may be appointed but in no
case, illiterate lady has to be appointed on this post. In
context of the above scheme, the arguments of Mr. Rajeev
Shrivastava cannot be accepted that the educational
qualification was a “desirable” qualification. Clause-6
clearly states that since the Anganbadi Workers have to
render their services in various fields under this scheme
and for that they have to maintain huge records, therefore,
it has been said that they should be educated ladies having
qualification in the manner indicated above.
(8) The normal rule of construction is that general words
in a statute must receive a general construction unless
there is something in the Act itself such as the subject-
matter with which the Act is dealing or the context in
which the said words are used to show the intention of the
Legislature that they must be given a restrictive meaning.
Since general words have ordinarily a general meaning, the
first task in construing such words, as in construing any
word, is to give the words their plain and ordinary meaning
and then to see whether the context or some principle of
construction requires that some qualified meaning should be
placed on those words. It is a recognized principle of
construction that general words and phrases, however wide
and comprehensive they may be, in their literal sense must
usually be construed as being limited to the actual object
of the Act (Please see Principles of Statutory
Interpretation by Justice G.P. Singh, (Sixth Edition 1996)
pp 294 & 295).
(9) If on the above principles the word used in the scheme
like “desirable” is interpreted, the 8th passed
qualification has to be held as an essential basic
qualification with specified relaxations as are provided in
the scheme and it has to be read only in the said sense,
otherwise, the entire scheme would render infructuous and
it would not be fulfilling the object for which the same
has been made. There is further indication in the scheme to
give due importance to the qualification because the scheme
provides that in no case, illiterate lady has to be
appointed on the post of Anganbadi Worker. Therefore, the
educational qualifications, with certain relaxations,
prescribed in the scheme are `essential’ and the word
`desirable’ has to be read as `essential’ for the purpose
of scheme.
(10) For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any
illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the learned
Single Judge.
(11) The appeal deserves to be and is accordingly
dismissed.
(12) There shall be no orders as to cost.
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE