IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1306 of 2010 SUNITA KUMARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 02 26.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Aggrieved by her termination from the post of Anganbari Sewika by an order dated 14.8.2009 the petitioner approached this court in C.W.J.C. No. 14705 of 2009. Relying on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in 2004 (2) PLJR 833 (SMT. SAJJAN DEVI & ORS. VS. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.), the challenge was on the ground that the order of termination was in violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner had already preferred an appeal before the District Magistrate. This Court therefore directed the District Magistrate to pass appropriate orders in the pending appeal in light of the Division Bench judgment of this Court. Learned counsel for the State is unable to point out any discussion from the impugned order of the District Magistrate dated 1.12.2009 that the order of termination dated 14.8.2009 was passed after due opportunity to the petitioner. In that view of the matter, no useful purpose 2 is going to be served by requiring the State to file a counter affidavit which cannot in any event explain something, not discussed in the impugned order itself. The impugned order shall have to be tested on the recitals contained in the order itself. The District Magistrate has not even discussed the Division Bench judgment of this Court and if he was of the opinion that it was not applicable and the reasons for the same. The order dated 1.12.2009 being contrary to law is hereby set aside. The application stands allowed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)