The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs M.P. Buland Awaz Nari Shakti Aanganwadi Karyakarta/ Sahayika Sangathan Bhopal

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:45131
1 WA-1545-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
rd
ON THE 23 OF JUNE, 2026
WRIT APPEAL No. 1545 of 2026
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Versus
M.P. BULAND AWAZ NARI SHAKTI AANGANWADI
KARYAKARTA/ SAHAYIKA SANGATHAN BHOPAL
Appearance:
Shri Abhijeet Awasthi - Deputy Advocate General for the
appellants/State.
Shri Shobhitaditya - Advocate for the respondent.
ORDER
Per: Justice B. P. Sharma
This intra-Court appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh
Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand NyayaPeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 has
been preferred by the State of Madhya Pradesh and its functionaries calling
in question the legality and validity of order dated 03.02.2026 passed by
learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.5966/2023 whereby writ petition
preferred by the respondent-organization was disposed of with directions for
restoration of the State Government's share in the honorarium payable to
Anganwadi Workers, Anganwadi Helpers and Mini Anganwadi Workers
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
JAIN
Signing time: 7/7/2026
10:51:49 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:45131
2 WA-1545-2026
together with consequential arrears and further directions regarding

consideration, grant of gratuity benefits in the light of the law laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
2. At the outset, I.A. No.9008/2026 filed under Section 5 of
Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the present appeal is
taken up for consideration. The delay is marginal in nature and the
explanation furnished cannot be said to be lacking in bona fides.
Accordingly, I.A. No.9008/2026 is allowed and delay in filing the writ
appeal stands condoned.
3. The respondent is a registered organisation representing
Anganwadi Workers, Anganwadi Helpers and Mini Anganwadi Workers
functioning under the Integrated Child Development Scheme. The case of
the respondent before learned Single Judge was that the members of the
Sangathan discharge duties of immense social importance at the grass-root
level and constitutes an integral component of the implementation of welfare
measures relating to women and children. It was asserted that prior to
issuance of the Government order dated 27.06.2019; the State Government
was contributing a substantial portion towards the honorarium payable to the
said workers. According to the respondent, though the Central Government
enhanced its contribution towards honorarium, the State Government
simultaneously reduced its own contribution through the order dated
27.06.2019, thereby effectively depriving the workers of the benefit intended
to be conferred by the Central Government. The respondent further
contended that the workers were not being extended adequate service and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
JAIN
Signing time: 7/7/2026
10:51:49 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:45131
3 WA-1545-2026
retiral benefits despite rendering long years of service and, therefore, sought

directions regarding gratuity and other consequential benefits.
4. The writ petition also referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Maniben Maganbhai Bhariya v. District Development
Officer Dahod and others, Civil Appeal No. 3153/2022, wherein the
applicability of the Payment of Gratuity to Anganwadi Workers and Helpers
was considered. The respondent challenged the orders dated 27.06.2019 and
08.09.2022 and sought restoration of the State Government's contribution
together with consequential benefits. Upon consideration, learned Single
Judge allowed the writ petition in part and directed restoration of the State
Government's contribution, payment of arrears with interest and
consideration of gratuity claims in accordance with law.
5. Learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the
appellants/State submitted that learned Single Judge erred in issuing
directions for payment of arrears together with interest despite there being no
specific pleadings warranting such relief. It was argued that the State Govt.
had already undertaken corrective measures by issuing subsequent orders
enhancing honorarium and introducing a gratuity scheme for Anganwadi
Workers and Helpers. The grievance which formed the basis of the writ
petition had substantially been redressed by later policy decisions and
therefore the issuance of further directions was unwarranted.
6. It was further contended that learned Single Judge did not
consider the fact that the scheme relating to honorarium was governed by
policy considerations involving fiscal implications and allocation of financial
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
JAIN
Signing time: 7/7/2026
10:51:49 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:45131
4 WA-1545-2026
resources. The appellants also submitted that the direction regarding payment

of interest was particularly unsustainable in law inasmuch as neither any
statutory provision nor any specific prayer justified such award. Learned
counsel for appellants/State placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Makardhwaj Ram v. Jagdish Rai (Dead) Through LRs. and
Another, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1112, and submitted that judicial relief must
be confined to the issues which legitimately arise from the pleadings and
cause of action and equitable principles must be applied in a manner that
avoids unintended consequences.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent argued that the
reduction of the State Government's contribution through the impugned
order dated 27.06.2019 was arbitrary and had the effect of neutralizing the
benefit intended to be conferred upon Anganwadi Workers and Helpers
through enhancement of honorarium by the Central Government. It was
further submitted that the members of the respondent-Sangathan constitute a
vulnerable class of workers who have been rendering valuable public service
for decades and that denial of rightful financial benefits would amount to
perpetuation of injustice. Learned counsel submitted that the directions
relating to restoration of honorarium and consideration of gratuity are fully
justified and are in consonance with the law declared by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Maniben Maganbhai Bhariya (supra). It was therefore
urged that the appeal deserves dismissal and the order passed by the learned
Single Judge deserves affirmation.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
JAIN
Signing time: 7/7/2026
10:51:49 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:45131
5 WA-1545-2026
perused the record.

9. So far as the challenge to the direction relating to restoration of
the State Government's contribution is concerned, we find no reason to take a
view different from the one adopted by learned Single Judge. Learned Writ
Court correctly appreciated the grievance that reduction of the State's
contribution had the effect of diluting the benefit intended for the Anganwadi
Workers and Helpers. The direction issued by learned Single Judge is,
therefore, founded upon considerations of fairness and administrative
reasonableness and does not call for interference.
10. Similarly, the direction regarding gratuity cannot be faulted.
Learned Single Judge merely directed the authorities to consider gratuity
benefits in accordance with the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Such a direction neither creates any new right nor travels beyond the
framework of the governing rules/law. We are therefore of the opinion that
the direction relating to gratuity deserves to be maintained in its entirety.
11. However, upon careful scrutiny of the order passed by learned
Single Judge, we find substance in the contention that the direction regarding
payment of interest deserves reconsideration. The award of interest is
ordinarily founded either upon a statutory mandate, a contractual stipulation,
established equitable principles or a specific adjudication based upon
pleadings and evidence. In the facts of the present case, while the direction
for restoration of the State Government's contribution and payment of
consequential arrears is fully justified, we are of the considered opinion that
the further direction requiring payment of interest is not warranted.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
JAIN
Signing time: 7/7/2026
10:51:49 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:45131
6 WA-1545-2026
12. Accordingly, the order passed by learned Single Judge deserves

modification only to the limited extent that the direction relating to payment
of interest shall stand deleted. Save and except the aforesaid modification,
the findings, conclusions and directions recorded by the learned Single Judge
are affirmed.
13. For the reasons aforesaid, the writ appeal is partly allowed. The
order dated 03.02.2026 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition
No.5966/2023 (M.P. Buland Awaz Nari Shakti Aanganwadi
Karyakarta/Sahayika Sangthan, Bhopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh
and Others) is affirmed in all respects except to the limited extent that the
direction contained relating to payment of interest shall stand deleted and set
aside.
14. No order as to costs.
(ANAND PATHAK)
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
JUDGE
@shish^
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR
JAIN
Signing time: 7/7/2026
10:51:49 AM