IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4213 of 2007 Rita Kumari @ Smt.Rita Kumari @ Rita Kumari Sevika WIFE OF SRI RAM JANAM PASWAN OF VILLAGE- RAMPUR KAITHI, P.O.- ANGARAHI, P.S. HASPURA, DISTRICT- AURANGABAD, AT PRESENT ANGANWARI SEVIKA, ANGANWARI KENDRA, RAMPUR KAITHI, KENDRA CODE 48, HASPURA, AURANGABAD, NOW TERMINATED :---PETITIONER. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, THEOUGH THE SECRETARY, LABOUR DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER/ DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, AURANGABAD. 3. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, AURANGABAD. 4. THE DIRECTOR, B.C.D.S. PATNA, BIHAR. 5. THE DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, AURANGABAD. 6. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, HASPURA- CUM-GOH, AURANGABAD :---RESPONDENTS. ---------------------------------- For the petitioner :- M/S Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha & Pratik Kumar Sinha, Advocates. For the State :- Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh, G.A. No. 7. Mr. Indeshwari Prasad Mandal, A.C. to G.A.7. ======== 2. 29.09.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order bearing Memo No. 34 dated 12.1.2007 passed by the District Magistrate, Aurangabad, Annexure-9, whereunder appointment of the petitioner as Anganwadi Sewika of Rampur Kaithi Centre No. 48 has been cancelled on the basis of the allegations set out against her by the Child Development Project officer, Haspura. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that before passing the aforesaid order dated 12.1.2007 the District Magistrate never gave the petitioner opportunity to rebut the allegations made against the petitioner by the Child Development Project Officer, Haspura in her report. 2 3. By filing counter affidavit on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2-6, the Child Development Project Officer, Haspura herself has accepted the fact that petitioner has been removed from the assignment of Anganwadi Sewika of Centre No. 48 on the basis of the report submitted by her and before submitting the said report Child Development Project Officer had given the petitioner opportunity of being heard, as such, no formal hearing by the District Magistrate was required. Counsel for the State has further submitted that the post of Anganwadi Sewika is not a civil post and, as such, enquiry proceedings are not required to be taken before removing the Anganwadi Sewika as Anganwadi Sewika does not have protection of Article 311 of the Constitution. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, I am of the view that assignment of Anganwadi Sewika may not be a civil post but before depriving the Anganwadi Sewika of the opportunity to serve as Sewika, opportunity of being heard is required to be given to the Sewika as removal from the assignment is to the detriment of the Sewika. Before passing any order which has civil consequences it is imperative to issue notice and grant opportunity of being heard to the affected person. In the instant case petitioner was not given any opportunity of being heard after submission of the report by the Child Development Project Officer and for failure to apply the 3 principles of natural justice I have no option but to quash the order dated 12.1.2007, Annexure-9. Petitioner should appear before the District Magistrate, Aurangabad who should furnish the petitioner copy of the allegation report submitted by the Child Development Project Officer and thereafter grant hearing to the petitioner and pass a fresh order in the light of the cause shown by the petitioner. Petitioner should submit her show-cause reply within two weeks of the receipt of the show-cause notice annexing the allegation report of the Child Development Project Officer, whereafter the Collector shall pass appropriate order in the matter. In the event Collector is satisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner, she may be reinstated as Anganwadi Sewika of Centre No. 48 and arrears of honorarium for the period between 12.1.2007 till the date of this order shall depend upon the direction of the Collector to reinstate or not to reinstate passed in the case of the petitioner. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)