Gujarat High Court: In a Letters Patent Appeal (‘LPA’) arising out of an order dated 2-8-2024 (‘impugned order’), wherein it was declared that the Anganwadi Workers and Anganwadi Helpers shall be treated at par with regularly selected permanent employees holding civil posts in State or Central government, the Division Bench of A.S. Supehia* and R.T. Vachhani, JJ, set aside the impugned order and held that the mode and manner of recruitment of the Anganwadi workers and helpers was vastly different from the recruitment process for regularly selected permanent employees holding civil posts.
The Court further considered the arduous nature of work that is done by the Anganwadi workers and helpers and held that they are entitled to a living wage of a minimum of 24,800 and Rs 20,300 per month respectively.
Background
In the writ petitions from which the instant LPA arose, the Anganwadi workers and helpers had prayed for regularization of service and minimum pages at par with other part-time state government employees. They had also sought a declaration that the honorarium paid to them was violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 23 of the Constitution.
A Single Judge Bench of the Court vide the impugned order had issued directions to the Central and the State government to:
-
Treat the Anganwadi workers and helpers par with regularly selected permanent employees holding civil posts in the State or Central Government and whereas the Central Government and the State Government shall jointly formulate a policy for absorption of the posts Anganwadi workers and helpers in Government service and to confer consequential benefit of regularization to the incumbents on the posts in question.
-
While formulating the policy, specify the classes of posts in which the Anganwadi workers and helpers will be absorbed, the pay scale that would be available to them and the cut-off date from with the Anganwadi workers and helpers would be entitled to arrears.
-
Ensure that the Anganwadi workers are paid at a minimum pay scale of Class III employee and Anganwadi helpers be paid at a minimum scale of Class IV employee.
Analysis, Law and Decision
1. Treatment of Anganwadi workers and helpers at par with regularly selected permanent employees holding civil posts
The Court noted the Single Judge in passing the impugned order had placed reliance on the case of Maniben Maganbhai Bhariya v. District Development Officer, Dahod, (2022) 16 SCC 343 (Maniben case) wherein the Supreme Court, in light of the National Food Security Act, 2013 and Section 11 of the Right to Education Act, 2009, had held that Anganwadi Centers performed statutory duties and Anganwadi workers and helpers held statutory posts. The Supreme Court had further held that the ‘honorarium’ received by the Anganwadi workers and helpers was covered under the definition of ‘wages’ under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and they were therefore entitled to the statutory benefit of gratuity. The Maniben case further noted that the appointment of Anganwadi workers and helpers were governed by Government Resolution dated 25-11-2019 issued under Article 162 of the Constitution.
The Court referred to the Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967 (Gujarat Civil Services Rules) which prescribes conditions and qualifications for post of ‘Civil Servant’ and noted that the source, manner and mode of recruitment as well as the requisite qualifications under the said Rules were vastly different from those prescribed for Anganwadi workers and helpers. Furthermore, the Anganwadi workers and helpers were paid ‘wages’ and were not conferred a regular pay-scale.
Therefore, the Court held that the direction issued by the Single Judge for the treatment of Anganwadi workers and helpers at par with regularly selected permanent employees holding civil posts in Central or State government was fallible, impracticable and unworkable.
2. Formulating Policy of Regularisation
The Court noted that since the Anganwadi Centers do not have a permanent status and would be closed once the objective of the scheme is achieved, the Anganwadi workers and helpers appointed in the Centers cannot be treated as permanent employees. Further, considering the nature of the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme, the Court stated that absorbing the Anganwadi workers and helpers into Class III and Class IV posts respectively would not be a feasible course of action. The Court stated that the ICDS Scheme, under which the Anganwadi Centers were established, was made through an Executive Order passed under Article 162 of the Constitution and as such it could not override Gujarat Civil Services Rules which are statutory rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution.
Thus, the Court held that the Single Judge had erred in issuing directions to the Central and State government to frame a scheme of regularization of Anganwadi workers and helpers.
3. Equal Pay for Equal Work
As aforementioned, the manner and mode of appointment of a Class III or Class IV employee is vastly different from that of an Anganwadi worker or a helper with the former being appointed under statutory rules and the latter under executive order under Article 162 of the Constitution. Additionally, factors like the qualifications prescribed for recruitment, nature and responsibilities of duties and salary of post were not comparable in the instant case. Thus, the Court held that unless parity can be proved on the aforementioned factors, the benefit of minimum pay-scale could not be conferred.
Hence, the Court held that in absence of any comparison of work of Anganwadi workers and helpers to the Class III and IV posts, the Single Judge had erred in invoking the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’.
4. Direction of Wages
The Court considered the nature of duties and mode of appointment of the Anganwadi workers and helpers to hold that they were entitled to a ‘Living wage’ above the ‘Minimum’ and ‘Fair’ wage. The meagre amount of Rs 10,000 and Rs 5500 to the Anganwadi workers and helpers respectively was held insufficient to supply the needs of their families with all the material things which are needed for their health and physical well-being. The Court thus held that the denial of ‘Living Wage’ to the Anganwadi workers and helpers was violative of fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution.
5. Determination of Wages
While determining the quantum of wages the Court considered the following aspects:
-
Full time employment of Anganwadi workers and helpers;
-
Applicability of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 to the Anganwadi workers and helpers, and inclusion of ‘Honorarium’ in the definition of ‘Wages’;
-
Entitlement of minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1972 to the Anganwadi workers and helpers, once they are declared to be holding a statutory post;
-
Working for six hours;
-
Entitlement of Rs 14,800 as minimum wages; and
-
Onerous and arduous duties and obligations involving pregnant and lactating women and minors, which is unmatched to the duties of other part-time employees
Considering the aforementioned factors, the Court directed the Central and State governments to pay minimum monthly wages of Rs 24,800 to Anganwadi workers and Rs 20,300 to Anganwadi helpers subject to further revisions. The arrears of wages were directed to be paid w.e.f. 1-4-2025 within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of order.
Thus, the Court set aside the impugned order to the extent of treatment of Anganwadi workers and helpers at par with regularly selected permanent employees holding civil posts, formulation of policy of regularisation and the consequential benefits arising out of it and modified the order of payment of salary of minimum of pay scale.
[State of Gujarat v. Adarsh Gujarat Anganwadi Union, 2025 SCC OnLine Guj 3426, decided on 20-8-2025]
Judgement authored by- Justice A.S. Supehia
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant: Kamal Trivedi, Advocate General, Vinay B. Vishen and Nirali Sarda, AGP Gautam Joshi, Senior Advocate, P. C. Chaudhari, Advocates
For the Respondent: Vikramjit Banerjee, Additional Solicitor General Of India, Kartik Dey, Vyoma K. Jhaveri, Advocates
Buy Constitution of India HERE
