Mr. Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J. (Oral) - The issues involved in this writ petition being identical they are taken up for final disposal together.
2. The admitted fact position in this case is that Respondent No.6- Farida Akhter (writ petitioner in SWP No.1237/2014), at the time of her
engagement as Anganwadi Worker, was 8th class pass. She attained matriculation qualification in the year 1986. It is further admitted fact that
Mehmooda Akhter-writ petitioner in SWP No.1743/2014 was appointed as Anganwadi Worker when she was already a matriculate in the year
1984. Mehmooda Akhter was selected and appointed as Supervisor by treating her senior to Farida Akhter. That order was subsequently kept in
abeyance by the authorities.
3. The claim of the learned counsel for the petitioner in SWP No.1743/2014-Mehmooda Akhter is that the case of the petitioner is governed by
the judgment of the Court passed in batch of writ petitions with lead case SWP No.164/2014 decided on 06.08.2015. Learned counsel produced
copy of the judgment which is taken on record.
4. In this decision, the Court, while making reference to SRO 16 dated 28th January, 2004, mentioned that those Matriculate Anganwadi
Workers, who during their service attained qualification of graduation, will figure in the seniority of the Graduate Anganwadi Workers from the
date of obtaining of such degree. It is further stated in the said judgment that rule itself has created two classes of Anganwadi Workers, viz.
Graduate Anganwadi Workers and Matriculate Anganwadi Workers. It is further stated that seniority of Matriculate Anganwadi Workers, thus,
will not relate back to the date of their engagement as Matriculate Anganwadi Workers after obtaining the degree of graduation.
5. This judgment of the Court is based on law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled Shailandra Dania and Ors v. S.P.
Dauybey and Ors decided on 17th April, 2007 in Appeal (Civil)2219-2222 of 2002.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents, while referring to rule 9 of Jammu & Kashmir Social Welfare (Non-Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules,
1991, submitted that seniority of the members of the service has to be regulated under Jammu & Kashmir Civil Service (Control and Appeal)
Rules, 1956. Learned counsel submitted that Farida Akhter-respondent No.6, though, initially middle pass having been appointed prior in time as
Anganwadi Worker to that of petitioner-Mehmooda Akhter, has to figure senior to her in the seniority list of Matriculate Anganwadi Workers and
has prior right of consideration for appointment on the post of Supervisor. Learned counsel submitted that mere passing of matriculation
examination at the latter point of time will not change the seniority position of the Farida Akhter-respondent No.6. Learned counsel in this behalf
referred to and relied upon the judgment of the Court titled Nirmal Singh Bali and Ors v. Mohd Yousuf, reported in 2012(II) SLJ 343.
7. In terms of Schedule -VI attached to Rules of 1991, the post of Supervisor is to be filled up 50% by direct recruitment and 25% posts have
been reserved for selection to the post of Supervisor amongst the Anganwadi Workers who have rendered 5 years service as such and are
graduates and further 25% have been reserved for selection from amongst Matriculate Anganwadi Workers who have rendered not less than 10
years service as such.
8. The Rules of 1991 in itself have created 3 classes for filling up the posts of Supervisors viz. 50% by direct recruitment from amongst the
candidates who are graduate with training in Anganwadi Course, 25% of posts are to be filled up from amongst the Anganwadi Workers who are
graduates and have rendered 5 years service as such. Further 25% posts, as already stated, are to be filled up from amongst Anganwadi Workers
who are matriculate and have rendered not less than 10 years service as such. The rule itself has provided that it is the matriculate Angnawadi
Worker who is eligible for being considered for promotion on the post of Supervisor and undermatric candidate is not entitled for any such
consideration. The interse seniority amongst the Anganwadi Workers, who are matriculate, has to be reckoned from the date they obtain
matriculation qualification. The service rendered by a candidate as Anganwadi Worker but being not a matriculate would be inconsequential in
view of rule itself.
9. Admittedly, the petitioner-Mehmooda Akhter is a matriculate and has been appointed in the year 1984 as Matriculate Anganwadi Worker,
whereas, respondent No.6-Farida Akhter, though appointed at earlier point of time as Angnawadi Worker attained the qualification of matric in
the year 1986, thus, is having two years less service as Matriculate Anganwadi Worker than that of Mehmooda Akhter. Mehmooda Akhter in
terms of aforesaid rule position is thus senior to Farida Akhter.
10. The judgment in Nirmal Singh's case has been decided on its own facts. In that case the basic eligibility qualification for entry into service was
same for all the candidates viz. appellants and respondents. The persons would be eligible for being promoted to the next higher post only when
they would qualify the examination as prescribed by the rules. The appellants though had same eligibility qualification for being appointed on the
post but some juniors had qualified the departmental examination earlier than the senior employees. The seniority was to be determined in
accordance with Rule 24 of Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service (Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956. The departmental examination would make
them only eligible for being promoted to the next post and not make the senior.
11. The legal position in this case is totally different. It is only the Matriculate Anganwadi Worker who is eligible for being appointed on the post of
Supervisor, so service as Anganwadi Worker alone has to be counted for that purpose.
12. For the above stated reasons these petitions are disposed of. The petition filed by Mehmooda Akhter (SWP No.1743/2014) is allowed and
petitions filed by Farida Akhter (SWP No.2528/2013) and (SWP No.1237/2014) are dismissed.
13. The official respondents shall pass the orders in respect of fixation of seniority of petitioner in light of observations made in this order.
