The Delhi High Court recently ruled that the compensation received by Anganwadi Workers is insufficient, describing it as “a mere pittance.”

The court mentioned the financial challenges these workers face, stating that it is not unusual for them to seek additional income through other employment.

In the judgment delivered by Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, the bench noted, “The remuneration for Anganwadi Workers is so low that it becomes nearly impossible for them to support themselves and their families solely on these earnings.”

The case revolved around Parmila Devi, who applied for one of the 290 Supervisor Grade-II (Female) positions advertised by the Department of Women and Child Development. Of these, 25% were reserved for women with at least ten years of experience as Anganwadi Workers and a minimum education of matriculation. The remaining 75% were available for direct recruits with degrees in fields like Home Science, Social Work, or Child Development.

The advertisement specified an age limit of 27 years, with relaxations for certain categories: five years for SC/ST candidates, three years for OBC, and more for persons with disabilities (PH) and other groups. Anganwadi Workers, in particular, were eligible for age relaxation corresponding to their years of service, up to a maximum of fifteen years.

Having successfully navigated the selection process conducted by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), Parmila Devi was later informed that her application was rejected due to age limit concerns while she awaited her appointment.

In response, she filed an appeal with the Central Administrative Tribunal against the rejection notice dated August 16, 2019, requesting an order for her appointment as a Supervisor Grade-II. The Tribunal ruled in her favor on August 11, 2023, prompting the DSSSB to challenge this decision in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The DSSSB’s main argument centered on two certificates submitted by Parmila Devi. One certificate from the Department of Women and Child Development indicated her service as an Anganwadi Worker from May 14, 1997, to July 18, 2007, while the other, from the New Indian Educational and Cultural Society, confirmed her employment from May 25, 2000, to February 8, 2007. The DSSSB raised concerns about the authenticity of these documents, suggesting a potential overlap that could indicate forgery.

However, the Tribunal found that Parmila Devi had satisfactorily explained the circumstances surrounding the certificates, noting that her role as an Anganwadi Worker was not a full-time civil position, allowing her to work part-time for the NGO. Both certificates were validated, leading to the quashing of the rejection notice.

The Tribunal directed the DSSSB to verify the Department of Women and Child Development's certificate and, if confirmed, to offer Parmila Devi the appointment along with all associated benefits from her actual date of joining, with notional benefits starting from her original service date.

The High Court emphasized that in its writ jurisdiction, it does not function as an appellate body to reassess the Tribunal's factual findings. Upon reviewing the Tribunal's reasoning regarding the acceptance of Parmila Devi's Anganwadi experience certificate, the court found no basis for declaring the Tribunal's decision unreasonable, thus avoiding intervention under Article 226.

Acknowledging the minimal compensation for Anganwadi Workers, the court recognized the reality that many of them often seek additional evening work to support themselves and their families. As such, the court found the Tribunal’s rationale to be sound and did not see fit to intervene.

Despite the overlap of employment periods in the certificates, the DSSSB's strict adherence to its policy—disallowing the submission of hard copies after initial electronic documentation—led to its questioning of the validity of the documents. Ultimately, the court concluded that there was no justification for intervention and dismissed the writ petition.