IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13639 of 2009 ARCHANA KUMARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS With CWJC No.13640 of 2009 NITU SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 28.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. In both these applications the challenge is to the removal from the post of Anganbari Sewika. The facts are common to the extent that the order of termination has been issued on 31.8.2009 by the District Programme Officer on the dictates of the District Magistrate dated 1.9.2009. The incongrousness of the matter is too obvious and requires no further deliberation. Additionally by the notification dated 25.7.2008, it is the District Programme Officer who alone is competent to decide issues of termination of Anganbari Sewika under Clauses 11 and 12 thereof against which the appeal lies before the District Magistrate. The order of the District Programme Officer referred above states that it was being issued on the directions of the District Magistrate who has terminated the appointments. The abdication of his authority by the District Programme Officer and the issuance of order and the termination by him at the dictates of the appellate 2 authority is therefore clearly not sustainable in law. It is not in controversy that the District Programme Officer had issued show cause notice to the petitioners and they have replied to the same. The impugned order of termination dated 1.9.2009/31.8.2009 are therefore not sustainable and are accordingly set aside. Both these writ applications are now remanded to the District Programme Officer to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the cause shown by the individual petitioners. Let the District Programme Officer pass such fresh orders within a maximum period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him. The writ applications stand allowed to the extent indicated and with the directions contained aforesaid. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)