IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4955 of 2010 1. RAVI RANJANI SINHA W/O SRI MADHUSUDAN PASWAN R/O VILL.- RAJAWAN, P.S. ASTHAWAN, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR, I.C.D.S. DIRECTORATE BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE NALANDA 5. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REFORMS BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 6. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER NALANDA 7. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER ASTHAWAN, NALANDA ----------- 2/ 09/11/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 14.8.2009 passed by the District Programme Officer affirmed in appeal by the District Magistrate dated 16.1.2010 terminating the services of the petitioner as an Angan Bari Sevika. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the District Programme Officer on grounds of alleged deficiency in discharge of duties was in violation of principles of natural justice. If the order was invalid in its inception, the order automatically becomes unsustainable. He relies on a Division Bench order of this Court reported in 2004 (2) P.L.J.R. 833 (Smt. Sajjan Devi & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors.). The proposition advanced on behalf of the petitioner is unexceptionable provided the full foundational facts are - 2 - stated. No copy of the Appeal filed before the District Magistrate has been placed on record neither it appears from the order of the District Magistrate that violation of principles of natural justice was specifically raised as an issue though it has been raised in the writ petition. Whether notice/show cause was issued to the petitioner before termination or not, is a question of fact. It first had to be raised in the subordinate court in appeal and cannot be raised for the first time in this Court. In any view of the matter, the petitioner has an alternative remedy before the Commissioner of the Division against the appellate order. Only if the petitioner files such an appeal before the Commissioner within a period of 30 days from today, this Court directs the Commissioner to call for the original records and satisfy himself whether notice was issued to the petitioner and any cause shown was considered before the order of termination dated 14.8.2009 was passed. The petitioner shall be allowed to examine the original records during the proceedings itself. If the Commissioner is satisfied that the notice had been issued to her, he shall proceed to hear the matter on merits. If the Commissioner is satisfied that the order dated 14.8.2009 was issued in violation of the principles of natural justice, he shall proceed to act in accordance - 3 - with the law laid down by the Division Bench in Smt. Sajjan Devi & Ors (supra) holding that such an order of termination was non est. Let the Commissioner decide the preliminary issue whether principles of natural justice were complied with or not before issuance of the order dated 14.8.2009 within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt/presentation of the memo. of appeal along with a copy of this order before him. The writ application stands disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)