IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4142 of 2010 1. MAYA DEVI W/O VIJAY KUMAR R/O VILLAGE PARASTHUWAN BLOCK AND P.S- KOCHAS, PANCHAYAT KATHRAI DISTRICT- ROHTAS 2. SAVITRI DEVI W/O MADAN KUMAR R/O VILLAGE PHULLI, PANCHAYAT SARAIYA, P.S- KOCHAS , DISTRICT- ROHTAS 3. PRIYANKA DEVI W/O ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA R/O VILLAGE PARASTHUWAN, PANCHAYAT KATHRAI, P.S- KOCHAS, DISTRICT- ROHTAS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DIRECTOR I.C.D.S, PATNA , BIHAR 3. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ROHTAS AT SASARAM 4. DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 5. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 6. C.D.P.O BLOCK KOCHAS DISTRICT - ROHTAS AT SASARAM with CWJC No.4731 of 2010 1. DEWAJHARI DEVI W/O LALLAN PASWAN R/O VILL KHARAJ, PANCHAYAT BELHAR, BLOCK SURYAPURA, PS.SURYAPURA, DISTT-ROHTAS(SASARAM) 2. LEELA DEVI W/O COLLECTOR PASWAN R/O VILL SOHSA, PANCHAYAT KATHRAI, P.S.KOCHAS, DISTT-ROHTAS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DIRECTOR I.C.D.S. PATNA, BIHAR 3. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ROHTAS AT SASARAM 4. DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER ROHTAS AT SASARAM 5. DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER ROHTAS AT SASARAM 6. C.D.P.O. BLOCK KOCHAS, DISTT-ROHTAS AT SASARAM ----------- 4/ 02/11/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. In both these applications the issue pertains to termination of services of Angan Bari Sevikas for the respective Angan Bari Centre alleged to be in violation of the principles of natural justice. The orders of termination passed by the District Programme Officer/C.D.P.O. are dated 15.10.2009 and 9.5.2009 respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits - 2 - that it is apparent from the recitals in the impugned orders apart from the assertion made in the writ petition that the termination of their services for alleged deficiency in discharge of duties was in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioners filed appeal before the District Magistrate which has remained pending and without disposing off the same in accordance with law, orders have been passed for fresh selection dated 15.2.2010. It is submitted that the latter does not make any reference to what orders, if any, were passed in the appeal. Despite the writ petition having been filed on 17.3.2010 no counter affidavit has been filed till date. While C.W.J.C. No.4731/10 is listed for the first time, time for filing of counter affidavit had been granted earlier in C.W.J.C. No.4142/10. The matter pertains to one block Surpura in the district of Rohtas. In C.W.J.C. No.4142/10 the interim order was made on 25.6.2010 prohibiting further appointment. The services of an Angan Bari Sevika for alleged deficiency in discharge of duties cannot be terminated in violation of the principles of natural justice as held by a Division Bench in 2004(2) P.L.J.R. 833 (Smt. Sajjan Devi & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors.). From the order of termination dated 6.10.2009 and 9.5.2009 respectively there is no discussion that a show - 3 - cause notice was issued, served, reply filed and consideration of the same. The petitioners have asserted on oath that the order was in violation of the principles of natural justice. They are stated to have preferred appeals which are alleged not to have been disposed before ordering of fresh selection. It has already been noticed that the order dated 15.2.2010 directing fresh selection does not make any reference to final orders, if any, in the appeals preferred by the petitioners. It is submitted at the bar on behalf of the petitioners that fresh appointments have been made though the learned counsel is not in a position to submit whether these appointments were before the order dated 25.6.2010 in C.W.J.C. No.4142/10. The application is disposed with the following observations:- On the date that the petitioners appear before the District Magistrate, in their presence the District Magistrate shall call for the original records and satisfy himself if show cause notice had been issued to the petitioners and served upon them or not. If show cause notice had been served and the petitioners chose not to file any reply or appear, the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. If the original records are to the contrary, the order of termination shall naturally stand - 4 - set aside and the petitioners shall stand reinstated without prejudice to the rights of the respondents to proceed afresh in accordance with law. If the District Magistrate is satisfied that the petitioners had been served notice before termination and refused to reply or were heard before termination, the District Magistrate shall proceed to furnish a copy of the appellate order passed by him to the petitioners recording his satisfaction that the petitioners had refused to cooperate in the appellate proceedings. If date for hearing of the appeal was not fixed and it came to be disposed behind the back of the petitioners or if no final orders had been passed in the appeal the District Magistrate shall proceed to fix a date for hearing of the appeal in the presence of the petitioners. The application stands disposed in the aforesaid manner. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)