HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (227) No 1085 0f2009 PETITIONER : Smt. 'Sunita Rajwade, W/o Ayodhya Prasad RESEONDENT Rajwade Aged about 29 years R10 village Rumyadlh (Dandapara Tahs11 Surajpur D1stt Surguja (C G ) VERSUS ' ' ' ‘ RES?ONDENTS : 1. The Collector (Women & Child Development RESFONDENTS Branch) Ambikapur Dlstt. Surguja (C.G.) : " 2. The Chief EXecu‘ive OElcer, Janpad Panchayat, Sulajpur, Cistrict Surguja (C.G.) 3. The Project Officer, L;nif1ed Woman & Child Development Project Surajpur District Surguja (C G) 4. The Dlreetor Panchayat Ralpur (C G) V‘. Smt Saraswa‘u Kushwaha, W/o Devnarayan . aged about 33 years R/o v111age Rumyadlh (Dandaoara) Tahs1l Surajpur Dlstnct Surcuja (C G ) ’ (APPELLANT) . WRIT PETITIOV WDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTI] U IION OF INDIA SB Hon’ble Shri Satlsh K. Ag‘iil‘otrl, J Present: I ;Shr1 Ashok Ix Shukla Advocate tor the petitioner Shn Y S Thakur Deputy Advmate General for the State/ respondent No 1 to 4 ORAI; ORDER _ _ (Passed on _tn.__.___ 25 day of February, 2009) 1. ‘Thf‘e petitioner, by this petition, seeks to challenge the legality and i validity of the order dated 19.08.2008 (Annexure P/l) passed by the V respondent \lo 4 whereby the appeal preferred by the respondent No. -' 5 has been allowed 2. The facts m nutshell are that the respondent No 5 was appornted as l Anganbadi worker by the respondent No 2 on 25 09 2006 and posted at 3 Ariganbadi Center, RuniyadihDandapara, who joined her duties on: 05102006. Thereafter, Vide order dated 14.06.2007 passed by the V Collector the, services of the respondent No 5 were terminated on the _ I ground that she alongWIth other snnilarly Situated cand1dates have been, appornted contrarv to the rules and schemes The petit1oner Vide order: dated 15 6 2007 (Annexure P/2) was appornted 1n place of respondent; No 5 Against the sard order of termination the \respondent No -i‘ preferred an appeal before the respondent No 4 being Appeal No ”1V o ,‘@ 460/B-12U06D7. The respondem No. 5, afier hearing all the parties, allowed the appeal holding that the appointment of the respondent No. 5 was cancelled without affording her an oppoftunity of hearing and as a result, the order of the Collector cancelling the appointment of the respondent No. 5 was set aside. Hence, this petition. Learned counsel appearing for the peti oner submits that the respondent s of the respondent No. 5 as her I have heard learned counsel appearing for the patties perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto It is well settled prinCiple of law that any order which Visrts With Civrl consequences if passed Without followmg principles of natural justrce and farr play in action, is Vitiated Admittedly, the respondent \Io l in the instant case while y passmg the termination order did not follow the prinCiples of natural justice and fair play in action was also not followed In the appeal preferred bV respondent VO 5 the respondent No 4 has rightly set aSide the order passed by the respondent Vo 1 The findings recorded by the respondent No 4 is just and proper and needs no mterfelence In View of the foregomg, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed Consequently I A No 1 for interim reliedstay, also stands dismissed V , Sd/- batishK Agnihotri 7_ Judge No l has rightly terminated the serwcJ appomtment was contrary'to the Ang iibadi Scheme and policy of the State Government. p I l L, . :;~;J / ‘