IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.6701 OF 2008 SMT.RUPAM YADAV, WIFE OF MANISH KUMAR, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA HAJIPUR, POST OFFICE, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT KHAGARIA VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR, I.C.D.S. SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, KHAGARIA 4. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, KHAGARIA 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KHAGARIA ******** 2 03/05/2011 The petitioner’s engagement as an Aanganbari Sevika has been terminated vide Annexure-1 and 1/A. Annexure-1 has been passed by the Director, Welfare Department. It is stated that on inspection of the Centre Nos. 124, 128, 129, 139, 141, 269, 270 and 272 under Project Nos. 24 and 25, it was found that the “take-home ration’ had not been distributed. The consequential order has been passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Khagaria terminating the engagement of eight persons. Subsequently, the services of Aanganbari Sevikas at serial nos. 7 and 8 i.e. Smt. Shilpi Kumar and Smt. Sunita Devi have been restored, on the ground, that there was no money in the bank account of the Centre and as such, the “take-home ration” could not be distributed on the date of inspection, which is purportedly 23rd November, 2007. The facts as stated by the petitioner are that the 2 petitioner had informed the Child Development Project Officer vide Annexure-4 that Radha Devi, the Chairman of the Food Distribution Committee was out of the station due to some personal work and as such the money could not be available in the bank. When the inspection was made, it was found that the petitioner was present at the Centre, however, the “take-home ration” was not distributed. In order to substantiate the stand taken on behalf of the petitioner, Counsel for the petitioner also refers to Annexure-7, the account for the Centre which indicates that the funds were not deposited in the bank till 24.11.2007. It is submitted that since show cause notice was not issued to the petitioner, on the purported ground that the Aanganbari Sevikas have been informed through an advertisement in the newspaper that they would be terminated from service without any notice, the aforesaid facts could not be brought to the notice of the authority. I accordingly direct that the petitioner should file a representation before the Director, Welfare Department within a period of four weeks from today along with a copy of this order and the Director, Welfare Department shall pass an appropriate orders within a period of four months thereafter. Accordingly, the orders as contained in Annexure-1 3 and 1/A are hereby quashed as far as it relates to the petitioner. However, the petitioner would not be entitled to be reinstated until the final orders passed by the Director, Welfare Department. This application is allowed to the extent indicated aforesaid. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )