Read Time: 09 minutes

Synopsis

The Rajasthan High Court has held that no woman shall be denied public employment on the basis of her martial status. The High Court has quashed a condition in a circular issued by the state government, stating that applicants to the post of Anganwadi worker should be unmarried.

"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," a single judge bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta said.

"Depriving a women of public employment on the ground of her being unmarried, apart from being violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to a woman under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India impinges upon a woman’s dignity," the bench added.

The petitioner said she had obtained a graduate’s degree in Arts and a Computer Proficiency Certificate (RS-CIT) but was yet to marry.

The state government sought to defend the condition, contending that if after being engaged as Aanganwadi Worker or Helper, if a candidate gets married and shifts to her marital home (located at different place), the working of the Center where she was appointed would get hampered.

Answering the seminal question whether a candidate can be discriminated or denied public employment on the ground of his/her marital status, the bench said, "According to this court, the discrimination which is met out to the unmarried women on account of the offending condition, cannot be countenanced. The same is ex-facie illegal, arbitrary and against the very scheme of the Constitution of India, which guarantees equality".

The court said that mere fact that a candidate is unmarried cannot be a reason to disqualify her. 

"Present case is a classic case wherein, the discrimination encountered by women has been given a new facet. An unmarried woman is discriminated against a married woman. The ostensible reason given to support the impugned condition that an unmarried woman after marriage would migrate to her matrimonial house does not pass muster the test of reasonableness and prudence," the bench said.

The bench posed a host of question to policy makers 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 ! 

Holding that these are a few situations which can emerge in some case or the other, the bench said, "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 court also found that marital status or the condition of a woman to be married to work in Aanganwadi hardly fulfills any object.

The apprehension that after marriage, a women will move on to her matrimonial house is firstly baseless and secondly, it cannot be a reason to justify or protect the offending condition.

It noted even, otherwise, the Circular contained a condition which takes care of the concern expressed by the State. 

The condition which requires an applicant to be a resident of the area in which the Aanganwadi Center is situated is sufficient to ward off the apprehension of the State and further to ensure smooth functioning of the Aanganwadi Center, it added.

The court, however, allowed take a 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 Center migrates to a place other than the area covered by the Aanganwadi Center on account of marriage or otherwise, her engagement will be brought to an end.

The court directed the authorities to process the application of the petitioner, saying it will be obligatory upon them to engage the petitioner as Aanganwadi Karyakarta, if she is otherwise meritorious and eligible.

Case Title: Miss Madhu Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors