IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7154 of 2010 1. MANISHA KUMARI W/O RAMESH KUMAR R/O VILL./P.O.- NALKATWA, P.S. RAM GARHWA, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN (MOTIHARI) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT. BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR SOCIAL WELFARE DEPTT. BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DIV. COMMISSIONER TIRHUT DIV., MUZAFFARPUR 5. THE COLLECTOR CUM DISTRICT MAGISTRATE E. CHAMPARAN (MOTIHARI) 6. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER, MOTIHARI 7. THE DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, MOTIHARI 8. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, MOTIHARI 9. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER RAMGARHWA, DISTT.- E. CHAMPARAN (MOTIHARI) ----------- 2 19.01.2011 By common order dated 10.06.2008, as contained in Annexure-4, the Collector, East Champaran cancelled the engagement of a number of Anganwari Sevikas/Sahayikas. It is mentioned in the order itself that the C.D.P.O. was directed to obtain the explanation from the concerned Sevikas/Sahayikas and submit the same. But the C.D.P.O. did not make available any explanation of any one to the Collector and so the Collector assumed that no Sevika/Sahayika had anything to say in the matter and, therefore, he passed the said order. One of the Sevikas, whose engagement 2 was also cancelled by the said order, moved this Court through CWJC No.13189 of 2009. Her writ application was allowed by a Bench of this Court by order dated 13.10.2009, vide Annexure-8, remitting the matter back to the District Magistate, East Champaran to call for the explanation submitted by the petitioner, consider the same and after hearing the petitioner pass fresh orders in accordance with law within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order. Petitioner’s grievance also is that she had submitted her explanation to the C.D.P.O., but the same was not transmitted to the Collector for consideration. In the circumstances, following the said order of this Court, this writ application is allowed. The matter of the petitioner is also remitted back to the Collector for consideration of her explanation, give her opportunity of hearing and thereafter pass orders in accordance with law within the time frame fix by this Court by the said earlier order. For this purpose, the impugned order of the Collector and order 3 of the Commissioner which were quashed by this Court earlier are also quashed in respect of the petitioner. Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)