IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10455 of 2009 ARUNA KUMARI, wife of Sri Vijay Singh, resident of village- Pirwan, P.S.-Gurua, District- Gaya. . . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Commissioner cum Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya 4. The Deputy Development Officer, Gaya 5. The District Magistrate, Gaya 6. The District Welfare Officer, Gaya 7. The District Programme Officer, Gaya 8. The Block Development Officer, Gurua Block, Gaya 9. The Child Development Project Officer, Gurua, Gaya 10. Smt Malti Sinha, wife of Kishori Prasad, resident of village- Pirwan, P.S.- Gurua, District- Gaya. . . . . . . Respondents. ----------- 2/ 25.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 19.06.2009 (Annexure-1) whereunder her appointment as Aganbari Sevika has been cancelled by the District Magistrate, Gaya. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the order of cancellation has been passed without giving the petitioner opportunity of being heard contrary to the direction of this court contained in order dated 04.03.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. no. 1621 of 2009 (Annexure 6/1). In reply counsel for the State pointed out that the petitioner was heard on 11.04.2008 and 11.11.2008 but when this court pointedly asked whether petitioner was granted opportunity of hearing in the light of the order of this court dated 04.03.2009, learned counsel submitted with reference to last but one paragraph of the order dated 19.06.2009 that the matter was again heard after receipt of the order dated 04.03.2009 and impugned order has been passed after such hearing which fact is being refuted by the counsel for the petitioner. - 2 - Question of fact whether the petitioner was heard in the light of the orders of this court dated 04.03.2009 has to be ascertained, it is deemed expedient to direct the petitioner to file appeal against the order dated 19.06.2009 (Annexure-1) before the Divisional Commissioner, who should call for the records from the office of the Collector, Gaya and ascertain whether petitioner was heard subsequent to the receipt of the order dated 04.03.2009 (Annexure- 6/1) and pass appropriate orders considering not only the technical aspect of the matter i.e. compliance of principles of natural justice but also merit of the case of the petitioner. Any appointment made in the meanwhile shall be subject to the result of the appeal which the petitioner shall file before the Divisional Commissioner, who shall dispose of the appeal in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt / production of the memo of appeal along with a copy of this order. Uday/ (V. N. Sinha, J.)