IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11746 of 2009 Sheema Kumari, wife of Staya Narain Singh, resident of village Chak Kanchanpur, P.O. Rahimpur, P.S. Bidupur, District Vaishali Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Hajipur 4. The C.D.P.O., Vidupur, P.O. & P.S. Vidupur 5. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Kanchanpur, P.O. Rahimpur, P.S. Bidupur, District Vaishali 6. The District Welfare Officer, Vaishali 7. The Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur ----------- 02/ 08.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 28.2.2009, passed in Misc. Case No. 129 of 2008-09 by the District Magistrate, Vaishali, whereunder the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sewika at Centre No. 68 within Kanchanpur Gram Panchayat has been cancelled after hearing the petitioner in compliance of the directions of this Court contained in order dated 7.8.2008, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5225 of 2008, Annexure-3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the aforesaid order dated 28.2.2009 on the ground that perusal of the said order would indicate that the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled with reference to a report of the Sub- Divisional Officer, Hajipur, but before submitting such report, the Sub- Divisional Officer never noticed the petitioner and made ex parte enquiry report against her alleging illegalities in 2 her appointment. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that earlier this Court under orders dated 7.8.2008 had set aside the order passed by the District Magistrate on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and for failure of the District Magistrate to hear the petitioner before passing the earlier order. After remand as well, although petitioner was heard, but the ex parte report of the Sub-Divisional Officer, which was used against her earlier was again relied without serving a copy thereof to the petitioner and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner during hearing of the matter after remand, learned District Magistrate has again violated the principles of natural justice. 5. Aforesaid submission can very well be appreciated by the appellate authority after calling for the records from the office of the District Magistrate so as to verify himself whether copy of the ex parte report of the Sub- Divisional Officer, Hajipur was given to the petitioner or not and relied upon without serving a copy of the report on the petitioner. 6. As the original order of removal has been passed by the District Magistrate, Vaishali, who is otherwise the appellate authority, in the special facts of this case, I direct the petitioner to file appeal against the impugned order dated 28.2.2009 before the Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, 3 Muzaffarpur, who should consider the same in accordance with law, as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the memo of appeal along with a certified copy of this order after calling for the records of Misc. Case No. 129 of 2008-09 from the office of the District Magistrate, Vaishali. 7. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V.N. Sinha, J.)