IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17154 of 2009 LALITA KUMARI . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2. 3.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner was terminated from the post of Anganwari Sewika by the District Magistrate on 8.3.2008 and which has been upheld by the Commissioner in the impugned order dated 13.4.2009. The order of the Commissioner upholds the termination on two grounds. Firstly, that proper procedure during selection were not followed and secondly that the husband of the petitioner was a Panchayat Teacher. Learned counsel submits that a Panchayat Teacher does not hold a government post and therefore it does not operate as a disqualification under Rule 3(e) of the guidelines for appointment of Anganwari Sewika. The writ petition does not contain any challenge to the other part of the order holding procedural irregularities in the selection process in contravention of the guidelines. The law stands settled that if an order be composite in nature and the good part of the order cannot be separated from the bad part of the order, the entire order has to go. But, if the order is severable and while striking down the bad part of the order, the good part of the order still survives 2 full effect shall have to be given to it. Even if the contention of the petitioner be accepted that the alleged appointment of the husband as a Panchayat Teacher does not come within the mischief of Clause 3(e) which prima facie appears to be correct, it is that part of the order which shall collapse. The other part of the order holding and giving a finding of procedural irregularities contrary to the guidelines shall still survive and which has not been questioned in the writ petition. This Court, therefore, finds no merit in the writ application and it is accordingly dismissed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)