In its final judgment passed on September 4, the High Court said that a host of questions can be posed to the policy makers of the State.
“What if, the candidate marries to a boy of the same village or vicinity? What if, a married woman after being engaged as Anganwadi Karykarta moves to other place? What if a woman’s husband decides to live in woman’s parental home? What if, a woman gets widowed or divorced and decides to move to a new place? and What if, a woman does not wish to marry at all!”
These are a few situations which can emerge in some case or the other, the Court opined.
“The State can neither pre-empt any such situations nor can it prevent a woman from claiming job simply because she has not tied the nuptial knot,” the single-judge said.
The discrimination which is meted out to the unmarried women is ex-facie illegal, arbitrary and against the very scheme of the Constitution which guarantees equality, the Court stated.
The bench further held that a marital status or the condition of a woman to be married to work in Aanganwadi hardly fulfils any object.
“The apprehension that after marriage, a women will move onto her matrimonial house is firstly baseless and secondly, it cannot be a reason to justify or protect the offending condition. The condition of a woman to be married being absolutely unconscionable and violative of women’s right to apply and get public employment is liable to be declared arbitrary and unconstitutional,” the bench observed.
However, the bench granted liberty to the State to take requisite undertaking from the unmarried woman candidates or amend the circular so as to ensure that if a woman having been engaged on any post in any Aaganwadi Centre, migrates to a place other than the area covered by the Centre, on account of marriage or otherwise, her engagement will be brought to an end.
Source: Barandbench
