IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5975 of 2008 SAROJ DEVI, WIFE OF RANJIT PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MANDACHH, P.S. SOH SARAI, DISTRICT NALANDA. ----- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. DIRECTOR, CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, NOOR SARAI, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF. 4. DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF. 5. DIRECTOR, I.C.D.S. DIRECTORATE, BIHAR, PATNA. 6. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF. --- RESPONDENTS ----------- 5 26.4.2011 The order has been passed by the Chief Development Project Officer, Noor Sarai, Nalanda at Biharsharif terminating the services of the petitioner on the ground that she had not distributed the “take home ration” in the Anganwari Centre No. 27, Village Mandachh within the district of Nalanda. In the said order it has been mentioned that it was not necessary to serve show cause in view of a notification published in the newspaper, stating that in cases where the Anganwari Sevikas or Sahayikas are found absent from duty or are not performing their work in accordance with law, no show cause is necessary. Perhaps the Government thought it proper to issue the notification to make the Anganwari workers aware of the fact that they have to work strictly according to the guidelines formulated by the State Government and also to inform the recipients of the benefits of the scheme that they had a right to complain against the erring Anganwari Sevika or Sahayika. The guidelines however, provide that a show cause notice is necessary before terminating an Anganwari Sevika or Sahayika vide Clause 9 of the guidelines 2 of the year 2006. In view of the aforesaid facts, the Child Development Project Officer, Noor Sarai, Nalanda should forward his report to the District Programme Officer for consideration and after considering the report, the District Programme Officer should pass an appropriate order within a period of four weeks on receipt of a copy of this order. The impugned order contained in Annexure-2 dated 23.1.2008 is thus quashed. However, it is made clear that quashing of the impugned annexure would not entitle the petitioner to be reinstated as an Anganwari Sevika until final decision in this matter. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Sanjay ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)