,s ^s^- -/'' ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR^ CORAM: Hon'ble Shri Raieev Gupta, C.J. 8B Hon'ble ShrLSunil Kumar Sinha. J. Writ Apoeal No. 104 of 2007 Kaushliya Bai Vs. State of Chhattisgarh 8s others ^ ORDER Hon'ble S*hri Justice Raieev Gupta For eonsideration Sd/- Sunii Kumar Sinha to' J ^^><-^ Sd/- ChiefJustice ——r' Post for order : ZO /04/2009 Sd/- SunilKumar Sinha Judge ,gt:.:tKJ:(^Jttii!-MM^'M;l?ffi^^^K!^3;----S!3Snm^ ^h ^' A±& '"~y ^ - -\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CORAM: HonT»leShri Rajeev Guota. C.J. & Hon^le Shri SunU Kumar Sinha, J. APPELLANT Writ Appeal No. 104 of 2007 Kaushliya Bai, W/p Pawan Das, aged 22 years, Village- Amaldiha, Tahsil- Pandariya, Dista-ict- Kabeerdham (C.G.) RESPONDENTS 1 2. 3. 4. 5. 7, 8. Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through -Secretary, Women and Child Development Department,' D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Collector, Kabeerdham District- Kabeerdham (C.G.) Additional, Collector, Kabeerdham, District- Kabeerdham (C.G.) District Child and Women Development Officer, District- Kabeerdham (C.G.) Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Project, Tahsil- Pandariya, District- Kabeerdham (C.G.) Janpad Panchayat, Pandariya Through its Chief Executive Officer, District- Kabeerdham, (C.G.) Gram Panchayat, Amaldiha through its Secretary, Tahsil- Pandariya, District- Kabeerdham (C.G.) Shantpsh Yadav, W/o Ramavatar Yadav, R/o Viflage- Amaldiha, Tahsil- Pandariya, District- Kabeerdham (C.G.) (Writ Appeal under Section 2 Sub-Section (11 ofthe .»ChhattisearhHigh CourttAopeal to Division Benchl Act,20061 Appearance: Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Courisel for the appellant. Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. Govt. '.Advocate for the State/respondents 1 to 5. Mr. Bhar,at Rajput,Counsel for respondent No.8. None for respondents No. 6 & 7. UWii^-^fy^li^^'^^^ ^!-?Aiy^.itS!ti'i^siualuA.sii^KWi -K'!^Lss^i; wnouaiuMiaieaBuniji .."- Writ Appeal No. 104 of 2007 ORDER (ZO .04.2009) FoUowing order of the Court Sunil Kumar Sinha. J. was delivered by (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 Coiirt, 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 schenie are 'essential' or 'desirable' ? (ii) WTiether the word 'desirable' used in the scheme has to be read as 'essential' for the purpose of scheme ? (2) Facts brieHy 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 Cerdficate Examination; both were the local candidates, therefore, the preference had to be given to respondent No. 8. The Additional fi'ollector, 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 sheshould be appointed as Anganbadi Worker of the concemed village m Gram, Panchayat. The said order was challenged by the appellant l!- -^ 7t\ '••'••"•s-snsassiiaasswissiissi.agsifSa^ F4Wfl.m;wsMiip%ffffi;;&Ai tW.^s^ is^d^M?-^^^^y^y^yyiE}BgaM)Rt Rl^UfiaS^^auMWfl ne \ Writ Aripeal No. 104 of 2007 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 hot 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, leamed 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 leamed 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, leamed counsel appearing on behgdf of respondent No.8, opposed these arguments and supported the order passed by the learned Single Judge. (5) We have heard the leamed eounsel for the parties at length jy 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 \ Artnexure P/1 in the Writ Petition. It reads as under:- ifilll; i ;SESS!BS^»!CaaS®W15rSffl(^'^ESS'R&t®3E'S"E^iaWi'IBia>»saW!iy!''^ :-^B»f^»aS^S^ ^^Si|!BIWaaK£UiuU;U!BssE^ft^vi-a^raTOiim^3Srii^i^ WritAppealNo. 104 of2007 "' 11 ati'i'i^i.^ qiptelf/wrRfq?T g5t pl^f^t i^ ai^rrir | | |3T | 3ii<iicii^) <M4<paf - sii'iiEii^ q?i4^trf ^ (18 ^ 44 ^ cf^ 3(1^) '»)i4ct)fll ?pift I Ttf^l; TIRT chl4c|idf3ft f^ WI^ 1000/- Pfaff ^PT ^f^ cpt W^ 938/- ItRr 'TO TTH tq f^TT ulT^TT I. 'OT^ TT^ ^ f^RT f^3lf q?r fNR' KJH f^qr ^ 1 -. (1) (2) (3) sfpTOi^ *i4chdf ^ft ?Tm/''w? cift f^Rft ^ Tfm qqpicr ^r? ^ ^t ^r ?uf wwi gf'-ft :Eirf^ f^t TnTf/''FR ^ WTOT^I ^icft ^fpft IR^Tf^T t, fNT ift fN^ ^r ^?T 'InTr/''T7R ^ ^i^ ':rf^iT ^ cti|4*rl5 ^ WT^ ^ ^3T ull^ I sfi'i'isii^ *i4*dt3rf c^ f^ ti^Rd c^ un^ zricft Trfi?iT WI^T ^r ^cppi ^t 'nan ^wi "^r ffw cf^ ^ STOT ?r, ?nfe 'q? •Fifirn ^%?T'^r ii^T cR 'TRrf^Wr cf>r ^iti^'i ^te OT ^r c^ ^ i 3TSIcfT OT3T WCT3ff/^t;T (?R)PT ^ pjciKTia (4) 3TSRT ^NtrT W^q gi2}crr ^fc^ •?Ft W^ ^ SlfiT^T^t .ct>l4ct>fli FlqTO ^ f^TT W ^TT 1 -~^ f^ft 1^FRM TOtelfN ^ SRT 3^ R?c ^t ^TRft t crt q? ^t Fl^Rrf ^ ST^TBT ^t ufRft t 3farc[T 4<ilfE)ct)|'i1 ^racT ^ ^l' W ^ f?H? ^S: K'W^Wt (Sf^Vi) ^ ^TTT 1 anf^i ^nRr *?*ii"i f^n7T &NT w\K\v\ ?ncff3f]r, fNNcR SITW ^nciTgff ^ [f; ?t^ cR?ft ^ f^EltR^ Sf^TT '^ cfRft SI^gf^cT uTlf^/< uHuilf^ 9^ ^ftcffsff ~cS\ ^T^ TTW ^t ai'i'1611^1 fr ^Tfcrf/witer ^ ter i^f ^ f^rqf^T ^ HN^IT ^t ^f i (5) f^-T ^f f^raT/^R^iftii ifersff ci?t wNr f^ Ti^n'3ff q?- wTf^fT ^r ufi^ ^t 'jd^ ^RTcf (a) 'TNt ^37 c^ ^[ •ito -gnn ^ ^ I^[R i ^) ai^Rid ^nRr/si-i^Rd ^H ^fTf?r ^ irRm? i (6) trafR? 3fi*i'icii^ ^es^i qrr ^r qW-ir ^ sra^f f^R Ws !RFT ^r W f^S f, q- ^fl^ f^ ^.t qiii)5t j^i ^CT sltTr t | gRT: ??? tf^ cbi4*c)f ^cp ?r i ^ ^ m? ^ ?t cfr PifecT wrTftdT ^t Prqte ^ "n^ ^ ^ ~st? ^ 'OTcW ^ 5l rfr ^f •m ^f w ^ -" . f^t f^ 'H^til'i 'qftcfT ^ Pl^Rtl ^t ^ g 31^]? ^ftcIT ^l 'cRT^ Fl^Rd ^ ?f l ^T SfiRciiA ^'^r yf?f WSTOTT W y^lcl 6[g(T cRt, Tff?RSN f^ ^^(^l'i TfftcfT cl?t ift Pl^Rrl c|Sf uir-TO(ft f | ^ft fN^ ^i ^sw ^ f^ft M^ arf^r^ siici^* f^i^ wiTRff ^rar uiHr. ? , f^ ^T q^TRr ir ^r srf^r ^ ^r ^4 ^ f^^r ^ •yrdH ct>|4c|iaf ^r f^ qH^T ^ ^ ^Mt f^T'uTT W^TT ? ^ yR? ^ ^'?iRr^r ^ ?pft i -- \(7) ^FT^T ^f Tf STPFW^ wferf ^^dri B^ srf^T^ t | "' \ ' > . • ! / 1 y^i \f^ ;;r Writ Appeal No. 104 of 2007 w (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 qualiGcation may be appointed but in no case, UUterate lady has ta 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 fhe Anganbaai Workers ha.ve to render their services in various fields under this scheme and for that they have to maintain huge reeords, 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 fhat general words m a statute must receive a general Gonstn-iction unless there is something in the Act itself such as.the subject-matter wifh which the Act is dealing or the context in which the said words are used ^- to show the intention ofthe Legislature that they must be given a resfrictive meaning, Since general words have ordinarily a general meaning, the first task in construingsuch words, as in construing any word, is to give the words their plain and ordinary meaning and then to see whether the context or sotoe principle of v- construction requires that some qualified meaning should be i.1)f ••yT'^rhsftwt' 'i!<saa ltt WritApDealNo. 104 of 2007 ^ placed pn 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 [Plecise see Prindples of Statutorsi Interpretation by Jtistice G.P. Singh, (Stxth Edition 1996) oo 294 & 295). (9) If on the above principles the word used in the scheme Uke "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 woiild 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 fhat 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 Ulegality 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. Sd/- ChiefJustice Suni Sd/- ^,^^: aKuroarSinha ^"'''n^'"" ^[•[If.l