Rani Devi And 4 Ors. vs State Of U.P. Through The Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 21942 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:54121
 
Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3064 of 2003
 

 
Petitioner :- Rani Devi And 4 Ors.
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through The Secy. Deptt. Of Child Devp.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- P.N.Bajpai,Narvind Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S..C
 

 
Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.

1. Heard Sri Narvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.

2. Rejoinder affidavit filed today in Court, is taken on record.

3. On 22.1.2003, an advertisement has been issued for appointment on the post of Anganbari Worker/ Karyakarti/ Assistant for different Anganbari Kendra in Bal Vikas Pariyojna, District Hardoi.

4. In pursuance to the said advertisement, the petitioners submitted their candidature and they were selected and given appointment by the competent authority by order dated 10.2.2003. While they were working and discharging their duties, their services were terminated by order dated 2.5.2003 (Annexure No. 12) passed by District Program Officer (respondent No.4). Aggrieved by the said facts, the petitioners have filed present writ petition before this Court.

5. On 23.5.2003, this Court has passed an order, relevant portion quoted as under:-

"Meanwhile the operation of the order dated 02.05.2003 as contained in Annexure no. 12 to the writ petition shall remain stayed."

6. It is not in dispute between the parties that in pursuance to the said order, the petitioners are still working and discharging their duties, however, from the perusal of the record, it also transpires that prior to passing of the impugned order, no opportunity whatsoever has been given to the petitioners, so the impugned order passed by opposite party is in contravention to principles of natural justice as laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd. & Ors. JT 2012 (10) SC 476 in paragraph no.3 held as under:-

"The principles of natural justice embody the right to every person to represent his interest to the court of justice. Pronouncing a judgment which adversely affects the interest of the party to the proceedings who was not given a chance to represent his/its case is unacceptable under the principles of natural justice."

7. For the foregoing reasons, writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 2.5.2003 (Annexure No. 12) passed by the respondent No.4 is set aside.

8. However, it will be open to official respondent to proceed afresh in accordance with law, if so advised.

Order Date :- 16.8.2023

Gautam