IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17878 of 2011 Vibha Kumari @ Vibha Devi, Wife of Sri Manoj Kumar, Resident of Village Kharitaria, PS Gurua, District Gaya (Bihar). ----- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director, I.C.D.S. Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Gaya. 4. The District Programme Officer, Gaya. 5. The Sub-divisional Officer, Sherghati (Gaya). 6. The Child Development Project Officer (C.D.P.O.), Gurua, District Gaya. 7. Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya --- Respondents ----------- 2 14.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.C. to G.A. 10 for the respondents. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 25.11.2009, passed by the District Programme Officer, Gaya cancelling her appointment to the post of Anganwari Sevika in Anganwari Centre No. 104, Village Kharitaira within the Gram Panchayat-Kaj, Block Gurua (Gaya) which has been upheld by the District Magistrate, Gaya by order dated 25.11.2009 and also upheld by the order dated 11.8.2011, passed by the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal before the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya has been dismissed on the ground that it is barred by 2 limitation. Otherwise, he submits that the petitioner has been removed only on the basis of the enquiry report of the Block Development Officer, Gurua dated 3.7.2009. He submits that the said report was in retaliation to the deposition of the husband of the petitioner against the Block Development Officer, Gurua on 6.6.2009 before the Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Case No. 172 of 2009 in which he had supported the allegation against the Block Development Officer, Gurua with regard to trying to influence the voters. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds that the said report by the Block Development Officer, Gurua was totally unjustified and cannot be sustained for the reason that just three weeks prior to the said inspection the husband of the petitioner had deposed against him and in that view of the matter he had personal grudge and reliance on such enquiry report for removing the petitioner from service thus, in the opinion of this Court is totally unjustified. The order of the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya dismissing the appeal of the petitioner only on the ground of limitation is also not 3 proper. Accordingly, the matter is remitted back to the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya for fresh consideration in light of the discussions made hereinabove. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya who is hereby impleaded as respondent No. 7, shall after hearing the petitioner pass appropriate orders within six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order upon him. With the aforementioned directions, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sanjay (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)