Rekha Rani Ghosh v. State Of West Bengal & ORS

26.09.2023 Ct. No. 15 adeb W.P.A. 2649 of 2015 Rekha Rani Ghosh Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Md. Salahuddin Md. Ahsanuzzaman Md. Raziuddin ...for the petitioner Petitioner participated in the selection process for being appointed as Anganwadi Helper and subsequently was appointed vide appointment letter dated 28th June, 2010.

Learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that from the date of her engagement as Anganwadi Helper of Kaliachak-I, ICDS Project, till date, she has been functioning in the aforesaid capacity. Petitioner claims permanency in her engagement as Anganwadi Helper. It has been submitted that the representation has been made to the concerned respondent authorities for consideration of her prayer to make her permanent Anganwadi Helper.

Today, writ petition is heard in presence of the learned advocate representing the petitioner. No one is representing the respondents.

Having perused the engagement letter dated 28th June, 2010 it appears that it has been specifically spelt out under the terms and conditions of engagement of the

petitioner as Anganwadi Helper that such engagement is fully temporary and can be terminated at any time and petitioner cannot claim permanent appointment or engagement against the permanent post and it has also been incorporated as one of the conditions of service that since petitioner's engagement was on purely temporary basis she would get only honorarium and additional honorarium per month for her work/duty as per Government order. Therefore, in consideration of the engagement letter dated 28th June, 2010 it is clear that petitioner's engagement as Anganwadi Helper was on purely temporary basis. In order to appreciate the claim of the petitioner claiming permanency as Anganwadi Helper this Court has posed query to the learned advocate representing the petitioner whether any Scheme or Rule has been formulated by the concerned respondent authorities in order to engage Anganwadi Helper on permanent basis. This Court does not get any satisfactory reply and no provisions have been shown to this Court justifying claim of the petitioner to be engaged on permanent basis.

In view of aforesaid facts this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings.

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)