IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No. 16131 of 2007 PARWATI KUMARI, wife of Bisheshwar Prasad Yadav, resident of Village-Datraul, P.O.-Datraul, P.S.-Pakribarawan, District – Nawadah ………….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya 3. The Collector, Nawadah 4. The District Welfare Officer, District-Nawadah 5. The Child Development Project Officer, Block Pakribarawan, P.S.-Pakribarawan, District-Nawadah ……………….. Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Adv. Mr. Ram Nath Saran, Adv. Mrs. Kiran Sinha, Adv. For the State: Mr. N. K. Singh, S.C.-6 ***** 04. 01.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner has challenged the Orders, dated 21.02.2007 (Annexure-7) and Order, dated 21.08.2007 (Annexure-12). By Order, dated 21.02.2007 (Annexure-7), she has been dismissed from the post of Anganbari Sevika by the District Magistrate, Nawadah on the ground that during inspection of Aangabari Centre, Datraul-3 by C.D.P.O., Pakribarawan, she was found absent. Show-cause, submitted by her, was also not found satisfactory. Finding in the impugned order is that 2 petitioner did not show interest in her work because her husband was a Government Servant. Order passed by the District Magistrate, Nawadah was challenged by the petitioner in appeal before the Commissioner, Magadh Range, Gaya, but that has also been dismissed by Order dated 21.08.2007 (Annexure-12). The Appellate Authority also directed to initiate process for appointment of new Anganbari Sevika for the Centre. However, the counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that till date no other person has been appointed as Anganbari Sevika for Anganbari Kendra Datraul-3. Petitioner was selected and appointed as Anganbari Sevika for Centre-3 at village Datraul, vide Memo No. 20/MU, dated 15.12.1997. She was sent for training for 21 days and on completion of training, a certificate, dated 15.05.1998 was also issued in her favour regarding completion of her training. Since 1998 till the date of issuance of Annexure-7, petitioner sincerely discharged her duties. It is the case of petitioner that her work was always found satisfactory, earlier on the occasion of different enquiries and in this regard the concerned Mukhiya as well as the other authorities have also 3 certified. On 09.10.2006, while the petitioner was at her Centre, she suddenly fell ill and giving intimation in this regard to the concerned Mukhiya, she proceeded on leave for her treatment and checkup. When the petitioner was absent from her Centre, suddenly Child Development Project Officer came to inspect the Centre. Finding the petitioner absent from Centre, show-cause notice was issued vide Memo No. 11/MU, dated 20.11.2006. Petitioner submitted her show-cause, explaining the reason for her absence and also that before leaving the Centre, she had sent an intimation to the concerned Mukhiya. Though she left the Centre, but still the Centre was open. Further, it has been submitted by the petitioner that the local Mukhiya issued a certificate dated 20.02.2007 with respect to the illness of the petitioner. The villagers of the concerned Centre also certified this fact that petitioner used to discharge her duties satisfactorily, regularly and her one day’s absence was sudden on account of her illness. The show-cause submitted by the petitioner was not considered to be satisfactory and vide impugned order, contained in Annexure-7, she was dismissed from her service. The termination 4 order was challenged in an appeal, but that was also rejected vide Order, contained in Annexure-12. Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 has been served by the petitioner. In the Counter Affidavit, there is an admission regarding certificate issued by the Mukhiya and the villagers certifying petitioner’s efficiency. But certificates of Mukhiya and villagers have been rejected on the ground that these have been obtained by the petitioner, subsequently, and no weightage can be attached to it. There is no statement in the Counter Affidavit that on earlier occasions also petitioner was found absent from the Centre continuously for 15 days. Guidelines, issued by the Department of Social Welfare, contained in Memo No. 2783, dated 03.10.2006, indicate that in case an Anganbari Sevika / Anganbari Sahayika are found absent from the Centre continuously for a period of 15 days, then a show-cause notice be issued to such Anganbari Sevika or Anganbari Sahayika, giving opportunity of defending themselves and thereafter order for termination / removal can be passed. 5 Admittedly, the petitioner was absent for a single day. In the Counter Affidavit also, it has not been stated that except that particular day, there had been any complaint with regard to petitioner’s continuous absence for 15 days. Presuming, that the petitioner absented herself from Centre, without giving proper intimation to the Mukhiya for a single day, the question which arises, whether that could have been a sufficient ground for termination of her service. She continued to discharge her duties from the year 1997. Her one day’s absence could not have been sufficient reason for her termination. The District Magistrate, Nawadah as well as the Commissioner, Magadh Range, Gaya, both failed to consider the specific provision regarding termination of Anganbari Sevika from service as mentioned in the guidelines. Considering all these facts, I find that the Order dated 21.02.2007 (Annexure-7) as well as the Order, dated 21.08.2007 (Annexure-12), both have been passed completely in contradiction of the provisions under the guidelines relating to service conditions of Anganbari Sevika and Anganbari Sahayika, which has been annexed as Annexure-11. 6 Accordingly, both the impugned orders, Annexure-7 and Annexure-12 are quashed. Considering the fact that till the date no other persons has been appointed as Anganbari Sevika at Centre No. 3 of village Datraul subsequent to termination of the petitioner, the District Magistrate, Nawadah and the Child Development Project Officer, Pakribarawan Block, District-Nawadah are directed to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Anganbari Sevika. Accept her joining and allow her to discharge duties of Anganbari Sevika at the concerned Centre on presentation / communication of this Order. The petitioner will also be entitled for all consequential benefits with effect from the date of her termination till the date of her reinstatement. Accordingly, this Writ Application is allowed. SKM (Mridula Mishra, J.)