I S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4265/2005 (Smt.Indira Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) Date of order :: 17.04.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.R.S. Choudhary, for the petitioner. Mr.N.S. Rathore, for the respondents. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for seeking direction to quash the impugned order dated 12th April, 2005 and subsequent order dated 20th June, 2005. The services of the petitioner are not governed by the statutory provisions and, as such, she is not functioning in a statutory status, therefore, the cause sought to be agitated by the petitioner is not justifiable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Ameerbi & Ors., reported in 2007 (2) SRJ 64 has held that appointments made under a scheme and recruitment process being carried out through a committee, II would not render the incumbents thereof holders of civil post. The petitioner was appointed as Anganwari Worker under the Scheme and she was getting honorarium. The Hon'ble Apex Court in above case held that the Anganwari Workers are not holders of civil post, therefore, they are not entitled for protection under Article 311 of the Constitution of India. The relevant paras 30 and 34 are as under:- “30. Appointments made under a scheme and recruitment process being carried out through a committee, in our opinion, would not render the incumbents thereof holders of civil post. Out attention has not been drawn to any rule or regulation governing the mode of their recruitment. Some statements in this behalf have been made by the interveners but for the reasons stated hereinbefore, we cannot enter thereinto. A distinction must be made about a post created by the Central Government or the State Governments in exercise of their power under Article 77 to 162 of the Constitution of India or under a status vis-a-vis cases of this nature who are sui generis. Terms and conditions of services of an employee may be referable to acts of appropriate legislature. The matter may also come within the purview of Article 309 of the Constitution of India as proviso appended thereto confers power upon the President of the Governor of a State or other authority, who may be delegated with such power, to make rules during the interregnum. 34. The decision, therefore, is an authority for the proposition that those employees who come within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India are not necessarily government servants. A 'fortiori the State in terms of a scheme may exercise control over a section of the persons working but thereby only, they do not become entitled to protection III under Article 311 of the Constitution of India.” On the basis of above adjudication made by the Hon'ble Apex Court, it is obvious that the petitioner being Anganwari Worker do not become entitled to protection under Article 311 of the Constitution of India. Upon above version, these circumstances, while following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court (supra), the present writ petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. A.K. Chouhan/-