1 2025:CGHC:48018 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5469 of 2023 1 - Sati Sen D/o Shri Ramji Sen, Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No. 4, Kachheripara, Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Draupati Verma D/o Prem Singh Aged About 42 Years R/o Naya Ward No. 14, Singhuri, Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Omkumari Sahu D/o Toran Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Khilora Post Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Womens And Child Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - The Director, Womens And Child Development Department, Atal RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Nagar, Indravati Bhawan, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - The Collector, Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 4 - The District Programme Officer, Womens And Child Development Officer, Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akash Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 18/09/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 To call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 To issue an appropriate writ or order and quash the impugned order dated 26.03.23 (Annexure P-1) to the extent of reducing the honorarium of Aanganbadi cum creche workers from Rs.6500/- to Rs.4000/ and further to direct the respondents to increase the honorarium of creche workers upto Rs. 10000/-equivalent to Aanganbadi worker. 3 10.3 To issue an appropriate writ or order and please to direct the respondent no 2 to 4 to take appropriate decision with regard to the increase of honorarium of the petitioners along with other crech workers within stipulated time in the interest of justice. 10.4 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioners are challenging the impugned order dated 26.06.2023, whereby respondent No. 2 arbitrarily refused not only to increase the remuneration of crèche workers employed in various Anganwadi centers across the State of Chhattisgarh but also unjustly reduced their honorarium (Mandeya) from Rs. 6,500 to Rs. 4,000, without affording them an opportunity to be heard, in violation of the principles of natural justice, rendering the order legally unsustainable. It is pertinent to mention that crèche workers in these Anganwadi centers are appointed under orders of the State Government and are responsible for caring for children aged 3 to 6 years. Furthermore, on 29.09.2016, respondent No. 1 issued a directive concerning the service conditions of crèche workers, which clearly stated that they are to be paid honorarium equivalent to that of Anganwadi workers. However, despite this directive, crèche workers continue to receive lower remuneration 4 compared to Anganwadi workers, which is in clear contravention of the said notification. Hence, this petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners respectfully submits that the honorarium paid to the petitioners, who are serving as Anganwadi Karyakartas as well as crèche workers, has been arbitrarily reduced from Rs. 6,500/- to Rs. 4,000/- pursuant to an order dated 26.06.2023 issued by the Women and Child Development Department, Raipur. It is contended that such a substantial reduction in remuneration has caused considerable hardship to the petitioners, who are engaged in delivering essential services at the grassroots level. Learned counsel further submits that the issue raised in the present petition is not isolated, as an identical matter has already been brought before this Hon’ble Court by similarly situated individuals. In that earlier matter, this Court was pleased to pass certain interim and/or final orders, thereby acknowledging the grievance raised and granting appropriate relief, and hence, the petitioners herein seek similar consideration and redressal in the present case. For the purpose, petitioners have already made representations before the concerned respondent authority. However, Counsel for the petitioners submits that liberty may be given to the petitioners to make a representation before the concerned respondent /competent authority, raising all grounds as they raised in this writ 5 petition and in- turn respondent No. 1/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the same within the stipulated period as fixed by this Court. 4. Learned Counsel for State/Respondents not opposed the prayer made by counsel for the petitioner. 5. Considering the submissions made by counsel for the parties, without going into merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of at this stage permitting the petitioners to make a representation before the respondent No. 1/competent authority within ‘2 weeks’ and in-turn respondent No. 1/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the same within an outer limit of ‘90 days’ from the date of receipt copy of representation. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat