IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5784 of 2010 "Mahila Apradh Niyantran Kosha Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2. 25.08.2011 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Tej Pratap Singh learned A.C. to S.C. 17 for the State. The writ petitioner is aggrieved by an order bearing Memo No. 822 dated 09.03.2010 passed by the District Magistrate, Nawada, whereby the services of the petitioner for running a Women Helpline Centre in the district of Nawada, has been withdrawn and the respondent No. 7-the Assistant project Officer, D.R.D.A., Nawada, had been directed to look after the works of the Women Helpline, Nawada, in public interest. It is the contention of the petitioner that the said order making wild allegations has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without obtaining any report from the D.D.C., the appropriate authority in this regard. Be that as it may. It is not in dispute that the Women Helpline was set up in the different districts of the State of Bihar by the State Government in its Department of Welfare and put under the regulation and control of Women Development Corporation, Bihar having its office at 2nd floor, Indira Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Women Development Corporation, Bihar vide order as contained in Annexure-3 issued instructions to the District Magistrates for taking steps for establishment 2 of Women Helpline and for appointment of an agency to carry out the job. It is again not in dispute that following a selection process, the petitioner was appointed by the District Magistrate, Nawada, to carry out the works of the Women Helpline situated in the district of Nawada. The District Magistrate, Nawada vide letter dated 01.08.2008 (Annexure-5) addressed to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Women Development Corporation, Bihar, Patna has informed him about the appointment of the petitioner for running the Women Helpline at Nawada with a further request for allotment of fund for payment to the agency. Its so appears that following a report submitted by the respondent No. 7 regarding the functioning of the petitioner at the Women Helpline, Nawada, the District Magistrate being dissatisfied by the functioning of the petitioner in managing the helpline and in carrying out the day-to-day work has passed the impugned order dated 09.03.2010 disengaging the petitioner from running the Helpline and appointing the respondent No. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievance before respondent No. 2, Managing Director of the Women Development Corporation, Bihar, Patna with supportive documents and which shall be considered and disposed of by respondent No. 2 in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt / production of a copy the writ petition after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Saif (Jyoti Saran, J.) 3