Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 – ss.1(3), 1(3A) and 2 – Gratuity – Entitlement to – Whether Aganwadi workers (AWWs) and Aganwadi Helpers (AWHs) appointed to work in Anganwadi centres set up under the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) entitled to gratuity under the 1972 Act – Held (per Abhay S. Oka, J.): Sub-sections (3) and (3A) of s.1 of 1972 Act, deal with applicability of its provisions – Clause (b) of s.1(3) applies to every shop or establishment within meaning of any law for the time being in force in relation to shops and establishments in a State – Anganwadi Centres are establishment within meaning of clause (e) of s.2 of the Contract Labour Act – Anganwadi centres have become an extended arm of the Government and now, operate as an establishment or a wing of the Government – They are establishments contemplated by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of s.1 of the 1972 Act – Remuneration to AWWs and AWHs is paid by the State Government – Honorarium paid to AWWs and AWHs is covered by the definition of wages – As AWWs and AWHs are employed by the State Government for wages in establishments to which the 1972 Act applies, the AWWs and AWHs are employees within meaning of the 1972 Act – Provisions of the 1972 Act apply to AWWs and AWHs working in Anganwadi centres – Held (per Ajay Rastogi, J.) (Supplementing) – Honorarium paid to Anganwadi workers/helpers is basically the quantum of money offered /conferred to somebody who is especially a professional or a well honoured person for providing services – It is a voluntary process – However, what is being paid to Anganwadi workers /helpers with a nomenclature used by the respondents in projecting the term ‘honorarium’, is in fact the ‘wages’ that has been paid for the services rendered at the end of the month – It is the form of emoluments which is being earned on discharge of duty in accordance with the terms of employment defined u/s.2(s) of the 1972 Act – National Food Security Act, 2013 – ss. 4, 5 and 6 – Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 – Public Health – Anganwadi centres.
Public Health – Anganwadi centres – Role of – Duty of the State to improve the level of nutrition – Held (per Abhay S. Oka, J.): Apart from Art.47 of the Constitution, India is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights – The said convention casts responsibilities on all States to recognize the right of citizens to adequate food – As provided in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 2013 Act, one of its objectives is to improve the nutritional status of women and children – The object of the 2013 Act was to bring about a shift in addressing the issue of food security – The approach was changed from the welfare approach to the rights-based approach – Role of Anganwadi centres finds a place in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 2013 Act – Constitution of India – Art. 47 – National Food Security Act, 2013 Interpretation of Statutes – Beneficial Interpretation – Held (per Ajay Rastogi, J.): When social security legislations are being interpreted, it always has to be interpreted liberally with a beneficial interpretation and has to be given the widest possible meaning which the language permits – When a statute is meant for the benefit of a particular class and if a word in the statute is capable of two meanings, i.e., one which would preserve the benefits and one which would not, then the former is to be adopted.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD:
PER ABHAY S. OKA, J.
1. It is the duty of the State to improve the level of nutrition which is one of the best methods to improve public health. Anganwadi centres were statutorily recognised under the National Food Security Act, 2013. Anganwadi centres have been entrusted with a very vital and significant role in implementing Sections 4 to 6 of the 2013 Act. It can be said that Anganwadi centres perform a pivotal role in discharging the statutory obligation of the State to provide nutritional support to pregnant women, lactating mothers and children in the age group of 6 months to 6 years. [Paras 8, 9, 10 and 12][773-F-G; 774-A-B, C; 776-D-E]
2. In view of the provisions of the 2013 Act and Section 11 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act), Anganwadi centres also perform statutory duties. Therefore, even AWWs and AWHs perform statutory duties under the said enactments. The Anganwadi centres have, thus, become an extended arm of the Government in view of the enactment of the 2013 Act and the Rules framed by the Government of Gujarat. The Anganwadi centres have been established to give effect to the obligations of the State defined under Article 47 of the Constitution. It can be safely said that the posts of AWWs and AWHs are statutory posts. In view of the changes brought about by the 2013 Act and the aforesaid Rules framed by the Government of Gujarat, the law laid down by this Court in the case of Ameerbi will not detain this Court any further from deciding the issue. The decision in the case of Ameerbi will not have any bearing on the issue involved in these appeals. [Paras 18 and 19][780-G-H; 781-A-C]
State of Karnataka and others v. Ameerbi and others, 2007 (11) SCC 681 : [2006] 10 Suppl. SCR 329 –held inapplicable.
3. It is impossible to accept the contention that the job assigned to AWWs and AWHs is a part-time job. In the State of Gujarat, the Government Resolution dated 25th November, 2019 lays down exhaustive provisions regarding selection criteria, duties, disciplinary action, rules, etc. in respect of AWWs and AWHs. In fact, by the said Resolution, the State Government has framed the Anganwadi Worker/Helper (Selection Criteria, Honorary Service, Review and Discipline) Rules. The Government Resolution dated 25th November 2019, which prescribes duties of AWWs and AWHs, does not lay down that their job is a part-time job. Considering the nature of duties specified thereunder, it is full-time employment. [Paras 13 and 20][781-D-E; 777-A-B]
4. Sub-sections (3) and (3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 deal with the applicability of its provisions. Clause (b) of Section 1(3) applies to every shop or establishment within the meaning of any law for the time being in force in relation to the shops and establishments in a State in which ten or more persons are employed or were employed on any day of the preceding twelve months. The question is whether clause (b) of Section 1(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 will apply. This Court in the case of the Labour Court, Jullunder has given a wide interpretation to clause(b). ‘Establishments’ contemplated by clause (b) can be establishments within the meaning of any law for the time being in force in a State in relation to establishments. Establishments have been defined in clause (e) of Section 2 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. The Contract Labour Act is applicable to establishments as provided in sub-section (4)(a) of Section 1. In view of sub-section (2) of Section 1, the Contract Labour Act is applicable to the State of Gujarat. Therefore, it is legislation in relation to establishments in the State of Gujarat. The selection and appointments of AWWs and AWHs are being made by the Government of Gujarat. An officer of the said Government is empowered to issue an order of termination of employment of AWWs and AWHs. Anganwadi centres have become an extended arm of the Government. Now, it operates as an establishment or a wing of the Government. The remuneration to AWWs and AWHs is paid by the State Government. However, the State Government gets contributions from the Central Government. Moreover, it can always be said that occupation is carried out in the establishments of Anganwadi centres. Hence, Anganwadi Centre is an establishment within the meaning of clause (e) of Section 2 of the Contract Labour Act. It is not the case of the State Government that every Anganwadi centre is a separate entity. Anganwadi centres and Mini Anganwadi centres are a part of the Anganwadi establishment of the State Government. The Anganwadi centres have been employing ten or more AWWs and AWHs in the State. There is thus no manner of doubt that Anganwadi centres are establishments contemplated by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the 1972 Act. [Paras 21, 22, 24 and 27][781-H; 782-D-E; F-G; 784-G-H; 785-B-E; G-H; 786-A]
Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa and others, 1978 (2) SCC 213 – held
inapplicable.
State of Punjab v. Labour Court, Jullunder and others 1980 (1) SCC 4 : [1980] 1 SCR 953 – relied on.
5. The definition of ‘wages’ is very wide. It means all emoluments which are earned by an employee on duty. Thus, the honorarium paid to AWWs and AWHs will also be covered by the definition of wages. As AWWs and AWHs are employed by the State Government for wages in the establishments to which the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 applies, the AWWs and AWHs are employees within the meaning of the 1972 Act. In view of the said Rules of the Gujarat Government, the Anganwadi centres are not under the control of the Central Government. Therefore, the State Government will be an appropriate Government within the meaning of clause (a) of Section 2 of the 1972 Act. Accordingly, a person or authority appointed by the appropriate Government for the supervision and control of AWWs and AWHs will be the employer within the meaning of clause (f) of Section 2. [Para 29][787-B-D]
6. Further, the Government of India by a notification dated 3rd April 1997 has notified educational institutions as establishments under clause (c) of sub¬section (3) of Section 1 of the 1972 Act. In the Anganwadi centres, the activity of running a preschool for the children in the age group of 3 to 6 years is being conducted. It is purely an educational activity. The job of teaching is done by AWWs and AWHs. The State Government is running pre-schools in Anganwadi centres in accordance with Section 11 of the RTE Act. [Para 30][787-D-F]
7. The provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 apply to AWWs and AWHs working in Anganwadi centres. Within a period of three months from today, necessary steps shall be taken by the concerned authorities in the State of Gujarat under the 1972 Act to extend benefits of the said Act to the eligible AWWs and AWHs. [Para 32][788-B-C]
Ahmedabad Pvt. Primary Teachers’ Assn. v.
Administrative Officer and others, 2004 (1) SCC 755 : [2004] 1 SCR 470 and Jaya Bachchan v. Union of India and others, 2006 (5) SCC 266 : [2006] 2 Suppl. SCR 110 – referred to.
Per AJAY RASTOGI, J. (Supplementing)
1. The role of Anganwadi workers (AWW) and Anganwadi helpers (AWH) is not only at war against malnutrition but have played a pivotal and significant role during the Covid-19 pandemic which was the unprecedented health war faced by the nation in responding to the various challenges posed. These frontline women workers are the backbone of the ICDS. ICDS scheme is not just a welfare scheme but a means of protecting the rights of children under six- including their right to nutrition, health and joyful learning and rights of pregnant and lactating mothers. The survival, well-being and rights of children become social issues of interest to the whole community and not just to the mothers of the families concerned. “Socialised childcare” also contributes to the liberation of women: it lightens the burden of looking after children, provides a potential source of remunerated employment for women and gives them an opportunity to build women’s organizations. In light of these rich contributions of childcare to social progress, ICDS deserves far greater attention in public policy since ICDS acts as an institutional mechanism for realization of child and women rights. [Paras 19 and 20][793-H; 794-A; D-F]
2. The contribution of Anganwadi workers/helpers at the grassroot level under the ICDS scheme is being well acknowledged by the Government of India, Ministry of Women and Child Development and in the last few years, it has also witnessed not only an exponential increase in the Anganwadi centres/workers but also significant specific efforts aimed at ensuring quality in the delivery of services and community participation. Indeed, the responsibilities of the Anganwadi workers/helpers have tremendously increased which now require to perform multiple tasks ranging from delivery of vital services, involving Community/ women’s groups/Mahila Mandals and for ensuring the effective convergence of various sectoral services. For restructuring and strengthening of ICDS, provisions have been made for rationalization of appointment of Anganwadi workers as Supervisors which is a cadre post under the Government. That apart, the Government of Gujarat has also come with a composite scheme vide its Resolution dated 25th November, 2019 laying down the procedure according to which selections shall be made through a transparent procedure to be followed laying down the eligibility criteria (including academic qualification) according to which the merit list of the candidates who had participated in the selection process for post of Anganwadi workers/helpers shall be made and if any participant/applicant is dissatisfied or aggrieved by the process of selection held by the authorities, can prefer an appeal to the Committee constituted for the said purpose. [Paras 42 and 45][799-H; 800-A-C; 801-B-C]
3. The honorarium paid to the Anganwadi workers/helpers is basically the quantum of money offered/conferred to somebody who is especially a professional or a well honoured person for providing services. It is a voluntary process. However, what is being paid to Anganwadi workers/helpers with a nomenclature used by the respondents in projecting the term ‘honorarium’, is in fact the ‘wages’ that has been paid for the services rendered at the end of the month. It is the form of emoluments which is being earned on discharge of duty in accordance with the terms of employment defined under Section 2(s) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. [Para 48][801-F-G]
4. In Ameerbi Case on which the Division Bench of the High Court has placed reliance, it was a case where the question raised for consideration was as to whether those who are appointed as Anganwadi workers/helpers are holders of civil posts and are entitled to seek protection of Article 311 of the Constitution. In the present cases, the question which has been raised for consideration is limited to the extent as to whether those who are working as Anganwadi workers/helpers are eligible to claim gratuity under the provisions of the Act, 1972. Therefore, the judgment of Ameerbi relied upon by the Division Bench of the High Court and placed by the respondents before this Court is of no assistance and has no application so far as the question raised before this Court in the instant appeals. [Paras 49, 50 and 51] [801-H; 802-A-D]
State of Karnataka and others v. Ameerbi and others, 2007 (11) SCC 681 : [2006] 10 Suppl. SCR 329 – held inapplicable.
State Bank of India v. Shri N. Sundara Money 1976 (1) SCC 822 : [1976] 3 SCR 160; Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa and others 1978
(2) SCC 213 : [1978] 3 SCR 207; Sant Ram v. Rajinder Lal and others 1979 (2) SCC 274 : [1979] 1 SCR 900; Steel Authority of India Ltd. and others v. National Union Waterfront Workers and others 2001 (7) SCC 1 : [2001]
2 Suppl. SCR 343; State of Punjab v. Labour Court, Jullunder and others 1980 (1) SCC 4 : [1980]
1 SCR 953; Ahmedabad Private Primary Teachers’ Association v. Administrative Officer and others 2004
(1) SCC 755 : [2004] 1 SCR 470; Jaya Bachchan v. Union of India and others 2006 (5) SCC 266 : [2006]
2 Suppl. SCR 110; Birla Institute of Technology v. State of Jharkhand and others 2019 (4) SCC 513 : [2019]
2 SCR 963 and Unni Krishnan J.P. and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others (1993) 4 SCC 111 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.