0212wp3643.09.odt 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3643 OF 2009 (MRS. DIPALI W/O RAJU KAREMORE VS. THE COMMISSIONER, INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICE SCHEME & 3 OTHERS) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr. A. D. Dangore, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P. D. Kothari, A. G. P. for respondent No. 1. Mr. S. V. Sohoni, Advocate for respondent No. 4. CORAM: D. D. SINHA & F. M. REIS, JJ. DATED : 02nd DECEMBER, 2009. Heard. The facts which are not in dispute are; The petitioner was appointed as Aanganwadi Sevika vide order dated 07/8/2007. Appointment of the petitioner was challenged by respondent No. 4 by filing writ petition No. 3702 of 2007. Respondent No. 4 was permitted to withdraw the said writ petition and order to that effect was passed by this Court on 16/12/2008 and liberty was given to respondent No. 4 to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of her grievance against the order of appointment dated 07/8/2007. Respondent No. 4, thereafter, filed appeal before respondent No. 1-Commissioner. The appellate authority heard the appeal on 14/7/2009 filed by respondent No. 4, decided the same by passing impugned order dated 14/7/2009 and allowed the appeal by setting aside the order of appointment of the petitioner dated 07/8/2007. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that as the petitioner was neither noticed nor given reasonable opportunity of hearing by the appellate authority and the 0212wp3643.09.odt 2/2 appellate order came to be passed by the appellate authority behind her back, hence same is violative of principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained in law. This fact has not been disputed either by the learned Assistant Government Pleader nor by respondent No. 4 though learned Counsel for respondent No. 4 submitted that appointment of the petitioner was not valid. Considered the contentions canvassed by the respective Counsel. In view of the above referred undisputed facts and on perusal of order passed by the appellate authority dated 14/7/2009, it is evident on the face of the order impugned that it is in violative of principles of natural justice, and therefore, it cannot be sustained in law since it is against the natural justice. For the reasons stated here-in-above, impugned order dated 14/7/2009 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to respondent No.3-the Commissioner, Integrated Child Development Service Scheme for reconsideration of the said appeal. The appellate authority is directed to grant opportunity of hearing to the appellant as well as the petitioner and decide the appeal on its own merit, in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. Since the impugned order is quashed and set aside, the petitioner be reinstated in service as Aanganwadi Sevika, forthwith with back wages. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of above observations and directions. JUDGE JUDGE wwl