2025:HHC:27713 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8313 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.12.2025 __________________________________________________________ Meena Kumari …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Hirdaya Ram, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as an Anganwari Worker at Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar, Circle Bechade Ka Bagh, Project Nahan, District Sirmaur, is aggrieved of order dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P-8), whereby her transfer from Anganwari Centre Jon Miyog, Circle Rajgarh, Project Rajgarh, District Sirmaur to Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar, Circle Bechade Ka Bagh, Project Nahan, District Sirmaur, has been cancelled due to the administrative reasons. 2. Since afore cancellation order was served upon the petitioner after her having joined at the transferred station i.e., Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar, petitioner is working at afore station uninterruptedly and pursuant to order dated 25.11.2025 passed by this Court, she has 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:27713 2 been further released part of the salary for the period she has worked against the post in question. 3. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Hirdaya Ram, learned counsel representing the petitioner is that petitioner herein, prior to her marriage was appointed as Anganwari Worker at Anganwari Centre Jon Miyog, but after her marriage, she in terms of Policy, applied for transfer well within time from afore station to Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar, which prayer of her was considered strictly in terms of Policy and she was ordered to be transferred vide order dated 14.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), but after her having joined at transferred station, District Program Officer, Sirmaur at Nahan, without verifying the factual position, proceeded to pass order dated 16.05.2025, thereby cancelling the order dated 14.05.2025, as a result thereof, petitioner is in lurch, because in terms of order dated 14.05.2025, she stands relieved from her previous place of posting, but she is not being permitted to work at the transferred station, on account of order dated 16.05.2025. 4. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceedings, respondents No.1 to 6 have filed reply, whereas despite service, respondent No.7 has failed to come present and as such, ordered to be proceeded ex parte. 5. Careful perusal of reply filed by respondents clearly reveals that petitioner herein was given appointment against the post of 2025:HHC:27713 3 Anganwari Worker vide order dated 07.08.2007 and since then, she had been continuously working at Anganwari Centre Jon Miyog, till the time her prayer for transfer from afore station to Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar came to be accepted vide order dated 14.05.2025 (Annexure P-1). Though at first instance respondents having taken note of Policy (Annexure P-2) framed by the Government of Himachal Pradesh for engagement of Anganwari Workers, proceeded to accept the request of the petitioner, but subsequently after receipt of application made by private-respondent No.7, whereby she also prayed for her transfer from Anganwari Centre Anji Banona to Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar, passed cancellation order dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P-8). It is averred in the reply that respondent No.3 issued transfer order in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 14.05.2025, but after issuance of afore order, it was noticed that private-respondent No.7, vide application dated 16.05.2025, had also applied for her transfer to the same Anganwari Centre, i.e., Nehar Swar. 6. Having noticed aforesaid fact, respondent No.3, without verifying whether claim of the private-respondent is justifiable in terms of Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh for engagement of Anganwari Workers, proceeded to cancel the transfer of the petitioner. At this stage, it would be apt to take note of Clause 4 of the Policy, which reads as under: “4. Transfer/Adjustment of the Anganwadi Workers/ Helpers 2025:HHC:27713 4 Under Anganwadi Service Scheme there is no provision of transfer of Anganwadi Workers/Helpers as these are honorary workers. However, only in case of Marriage/Divorce of AWW or AWH some adjustments/Transfer can be done as follows only once in a life time, subject to the condition that a vacancy exists/ arises at the place of her husband's normal place of residence/place of marriage or within the Panchayat area concerned, she can be adjusted on her request made within 30 days from date of vacancy arising or date of marriage as the case may be. Divorce/ destitute women living with their parents in Anganwadi area, but working at the place of marriage can be transferred to the place of Anganwadi falling in the parental area or within the Panchayat area in a similar manner subject to the availability of vacancy.District Programme Officer will be the competent authority to order transfer/adjustment of Anganwadi Worker/Helpers within the District. Outside district transfers will be done with the approval of Director WCD.” 7. Careful perusal of aforesaid Clause, contained in the Policy, reveals that though there is no provision of transfer of Anganwari Workers/Helpers, as these are honorary workers, however, in case of marriage/divorce of Anganwari Worker, some adjustments/transfer can be done only once in lifetime, subject to the condition that a vacancy exists/arises at the place of her husband’s normal place of residence/place of marriage or within the Panchayat area concerned, she can be adjusted on her request made within 30 days, from the date of vacancy arising or date of marriage, as the case may be. Besides above, divorcee/destitute women living with their parents in Anganwari area, can also be transferred from her place of marriage to the place of Anganwari falling in the parental area or within the Panchayat area in a similar manner, subject to the availability of vacancy. 2025:HHC:27713 5 8. Admittedly, in the case at hand, petitioner, after her marriage, applied for transfer well within 30 days from the date of vacancy at Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar and such request of her was rightly accepted vide order dated 14.05.2025 (Annexure P-1). Though reply filed by respondents reveals that private-respondent also applied for transfer to afore Anganwari Centre, but once it is not in dispute that Anganwari Centre, where at present-respondent No.7 is working, is already situated at the place of her husband’s normal place of residence/place of marriage, coupled with the fact that private- respondent No.7 is neither divorcee nor destitute woman, she otherwise could not have applied for her transfer from her present place of posting to Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar. 9. Careful perusal of application filed by private-respondent No.7 (Annexure R-4 annexed with the reply filed by respondents) nowhere suggests that private-respondent is a divorcee or destitute. If it is so, prayer, if any, made on her behalf for transfer from her present place of posting to Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar otherwise could not have been entertained. Once private-respondent No.7 is already working at Anganwari Centre, which is situated within the place of her marriage, coupled with the fact that she is otherwise not entitled to seek transfer on account of her living a happy married life, application entertained by respondent No.3, on the pretext of which subsequently transfer order issued in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 14.05.2025, came to 2025:HHC:27713 6 be cancelled vide order dated 16.05.2025, could not have been entertained, being not maintainable in terms of Clause 4 of the Policy. 10. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds merit in the present petition, and accordingly the same is allowed. Impugned order dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P-8) is quashed and set aside and respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to discharge her duties at Anganwari Centre Nehar Swar, pursuant to her transfer order dated 14.05.2025 (Annexure P-1). Needless to say, full salary of the petitioner shall be released expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two months. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 09, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)