Patna High Court
Usha Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 22 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8254 of 2020
======================================================
Usha Kumari Wife of Dhananjay Kumar, resident of village- Keshpa, P.s.-
Alipur, District- Gaya, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Director, ICDS, Patna, Bihar
2. The District Magistrate, Gaya
3. The District Program Officer, Gaya
4. The CDPO Tekari, Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Manish, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Asit Kumar Jhat, AC to GP 2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-11-2021
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following
relief/reliefs:
"The present writ application is being filed for setting
aside order dated 17.06.2015 passed by District Program
Officer, whereby and where under the petitioner has been
directed to be relieved from selection from post of Anganwadi
Sahayika, Anganwadi Kendra no. 53, Kespa and further
against only the part of the order dated 12.07.2019 passed by
the Learned Court of District Magistrate Gaya, in connection
with Anganwadi Case no. 03 of 2015, whereby and
whereunder the petitioner has been ordered to be reselected
on post of Anganwadi Sahayika at Centre no. 53, Kespa, and
further issuance of an appropriate writ or writs, order or
orders, direction or directions to the respondent authorities to
reinstate the petitioner to the post of Anganwadi Sahayika,
Anganwadi Kendra no. 53, Kespa South and further to comply
Patna High Court CWJC No.8254 of 2020 dt.22-11-2021
in letter and spirit, the remaining part of order dated
12.07.2019 passed by the Learned Court of District
Magistrate Gaya in connection with Anganwadi Case no. 03
of 2015 and further for direction to the respondent authorities
for granting all consequential benefits to the petitioner and/or
for any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be
found entitled to in course of hearing of this writ
application."
The petitioner was working as Anganwadi Sahayika along
with one Smt. Poonam Kumari, Anganwadi Sevika. Poonam
Kumari was subjected to disciplinary proceedings in respect of
certain allegation. While dealing with the Poonam Kumari's case
the petitioner's services have been terminated on 17.06.2015.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of termination
dated 17.06.2015, petitioner preferred an appeal before the
Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority passed order in
favour of the petitioner on 12.07.2019 with a direction for re-
selection of petitioner to the post of Anganwadi Sahayika.
Pursuant to the same the petitioner is stated to have reported
before the concerned respondent on 22.10.2019. However, she
was not provided the post and so also not extended monetary
benefits, thus, the petitioner has presented this petition, in
questioning the validity of the termination order dated 17.06.2015
and Appellate Authority's order dated 12.07.2019.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8254 of 2020 dt.22-11-2021
Undisputed facts are that petitioner was appointed as
Anganwadi Sahayika. In respect of disciplinary proceedings
against Poonam Kumari, Anaganwadi Sevika, the petitioner's
services have been terminated on 17.06.2015. In other words,
there is no initiation of inquiry against the petitioner Usha
Kumari. The Appellate Authority while passing order on
12.07.2019 ordered for re-select to the post of Anganwadi
Sahayika in so far as petitioner is concerned. The Appellate
Authority has not pointed out source of power in respect of
deciding appeal against order of termination dated 17.06.2015 that
the petitioner is entitled for re-selection to the post of Anganwadi
Sahayika. In other words as Appellate Authority he has to examine
validity of termination order and reinstatement only and not re-
selection. The respondents have not initiated inquiry against
petitioner Usha Kumari in accordance with law. That apart, the
Appellate Authority has no jurisdiction for ordering re-selection to
the post of Anganwadi Sahayika to the petitioner.
In the light of these facts and circumstances, the petitioner
has made out prima facie case for interference with the order of
termination dated 17.06.2015 read with the Appellate Authority's
order dated 12.07.2019. Accordingly, both orders are set aside.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8254 of 2020 dt.22-11-2021
The concerned respondent is hereby directed to take back
petitioner to the post of Anganwadi Sahayika forthwith and extend
all monetary benefits from the date of termination i.e. 17.06.2015
to this day and continue to pay salary.
The above exercise shall be completed within a period of
one week from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the
petitioner is entitled to litigation cost which is quantified at Rs.
50,000/- (Fifty Thousand). The cost shall be paid by the present
C.D.P.O., Tekari Gaya, fourth respondent from his/her pocket and
not from the Department or Government.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
GAURAV S./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 25.11.2021
Transmission Date NA
