IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.6243 OF 2008 SEEMA DEVI, WIFE OF SHRI AJAY KUMAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PANHRAWN, POST OFFICE PANJRAWN, POLICE STATION NUAAWN, DISTRICT KAIMUR (BHABHUA) …………………………………………………….PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR I.C.D.S. SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KAIMUR (BHABHUA) 4. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KAIMUR (BHABHUA) 5. THE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, KAIMUR, BHABHUA 6. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER, KAIMUR, BHABHUA 7. THE DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, KAIMUR, BHABHUA 8. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, -CUM- BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NUAAWN, RAMGARH, KAIMUR, BHABHUA 9. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MOHANIYA, KAIMUR, BHABHUA …………………………………………………………………………RESPONDENTS ********* 2 26/04/2011 The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure-5 issued by the Director by which the petitioner’s engagement as an Aanganbari Sevika has been terminated. The ground for termination is that the Child Development Project Officer and the Block Development Officer inspected the Aanganbari Centre situated at Sonabarsha on 14.12.2007 and learnt from the Mukhiya and the villagers that the petitioner has not been attending the Centre for past one and a half years. The enquiry report is contained at Annexure-3 to the writ application. The order of the Director indicates that no notice was required to be served on the incumbent as it has been advertised by the Government 2 that if the person is found to be absent from the Aanganbari Centre and was not performing her duties as per the guidelines, they would be terminated without service of any show cause. Such an advertisement or such a letter of the State Government have been issued in order to put some sort of fear in the minds of the Aanganbari Sevikas or Sahayikas so that they may perform their duties deligently. It also given an opportunity to the villagers to file complaints against the Aanganbari Sevika or Sahayika who were found continuously absent from duty or were not distributing the “take home ration”. However, the guidelines specifically indicate that a show cause notice ought to be issued to the person concerned so that she may give an explanation for the reasons of her absence. I accordingly quash the order as contained in Annexure-5 and direct the Child Development Project Officer to send a report as contained in Annexure-3 to the District Programme Officer who will pass an order after hearing the petitioner and the Child Development Project Officer as well as any person he considers necessary. A fresh application along with a copy of this order be produced before the Child Development Project Officer and the District Programme Officer within a period of four weeks from today. The District Programme 3 Officer ought to pass a final order within a period of four months thereafter. I may make it clear that the petitioner would not be entitled to be reinstated until the final orders is passed in this matter. This application is allowed to the extent indicated aforesaid. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )