IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3718 of 2010 1. GEETA DEVI W/O SRI ASHOK SAH R/O VILLAGE- SHASTRI NAGAR,P.S- BAGAHA, DISTRICT-WEST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIECTOR, INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SCHEME , BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTATE, WEST CHAMPARAN 4. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER WEST CHAMPARAN 5. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER BAGAHA, WEST CHAMPARAN ----------- For the Petitioner :- Md. Nadim Seraj, Adv. Mr. Zaimul Abedin, Adv. For the State:- A.A.G. 11 ------------- 4. 23.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Despite grant of adjournment no counter affidavit has been filed. This Court does not consider it necessary to adjourn matters any further on that ground. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an Aganwari Sewika. A surprise inspection of the Kendra was done. The Sahayika was found absent. The C.D.P.O. in his report dated 24.7.2009 states that the Sewika furnished information to her during the surprise inspection. Nonetheless, her services have been terminated by order dated 5.11.2009 issued by the District Programme Officer on the ground that the Centre was found closed at the time of inspection. She submits that in any event of the matter, no show cause notice before termination was given. 2 Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has an alternative remedy available before the District Magistrate in appeal. The impugned order dated 5.11.2009 states that it was being passed in pursuance of the orders of the District Magistrate dated 19.10.2009. A Division Bench of this Court in 2004(2) PLJR 833 has held that the basic principles of natural justice by giving of a show cause notice has to be complied with before an Aganwari Sewika/Sahayika is terminated, in absence of which the termination is not sustainable. The order dated 5.11.2009 is set aside. The petitioner shall not be reinstated immediately. Within 10 days from the date of production and/or receipt of a copy of this order before the District Magistrate, he shall decide only whether a show cause notice was given to the petitioner before termination or not by him as the impugned order states that the termination was passed on the directions of the District Magistrate and whether, the District Magistrate granted an opportunity to rebut the allegations against her. If this procedure was not followed, the District Magistrate is obliged forthwith to reinstate the petitioner without prejudice to his further rights in law. 3 If the District Magistrate is satisfied that a show cause notice had been issued and served upon the petitioner, he is required to pass a reasoned and speaking order with a discussion of all supporting documentary evidence and material within a maximum period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, in which event the present writ petition shall stand dismissed but without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to assail the fresh order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)