IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20620 of 2011 ====================================================== 1. Abha Kumari W/O Sri Ashok Kumar Resident Of Village:-Lodipur, P.S.:-Karpi, District:-Arwal. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Director, Integrated Child Development Services Programme, I.C.D.S. Directorate, Bihar, Patna. 3. Assistant Director, Icds Directorate, Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Arwal. 5. The District Programme Officer, Arwal. 6. The Child Development Project Officer, Karpi, District:-Arwal. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarendra Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh Aag7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA) 2 13-12-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner, an Angan Bari Sevika, alleges termination by the District Programme Officer on 7.10.2011 in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice. Learned counsel for the State submits from the impugned orders that there were allegations for dereliction in discharge of duties. Learned counsel for the petitioner rightly relies upon a Division Bench decision in 2004 (2) 833 ( Smt. Sajjan Devi & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) to submit that the Patna High Court CWJC No.20620 of 2011 (2) dt.13-12-2011 2 impugned orders could not have been passed even on the aforesaid allegations in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice without furthermore. Let the petitioner appear along with a copy of the present order before the District Programme Officer, Arwal. The District Programme Officer shall then pass a reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him whether the petitioner was given a show cause notice, duly served upon her and her defence considered before issuance of the impugned order. In that event, the impugned order shall require no interference and the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail alternate remedies of appeal before the District Magistrate. Conversely, if the District Programme Officer is unable to hold that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and her defence duly considered before termination, the order shall stand vitiated without furthermore requiring reinstatement of the petitioner. The respondents shall then be at liberty to proceed afresh thereafter in accordance with law. The writ application stands disposed. Krishna Chandra Jha/- (Navin Sinha, J)