Patna High Court
Kiran Kumari vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 10 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20527 of 2014
======================================================
Kiran Kumari wife of Hari Shankar Prasad Gupta resident of Mohalla -
Bahadurpur, Ward No. 27, P.S.- Town Samastipur, District - Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Welfare Department,
Patna.
2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Samastipur.
3. The District Program Officer, Samastipur.
4. The Child Development Project Officer, Rural Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pathak, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Raghwanand, GA-11
Mr. Prabhat Kumar, AC to GA-11
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-08-2023
The present writ petition has been filed seeking the
following relief:-
"1. That the present writ application is being
directed for issuance of writ in the nature of
certiorari or any impugned appropriate
writ/writs for quashing the impugned order
dated 19.08.2014. (Annexure-3) passed by
respondent -District Program Officer, whereby
the petitioner has been removed from the post
of Aganwari Sevika and her selection to the
said post has been cancelled on minor and
Patna High Court CWJC No.20527 of 2014 dt.10-08-2023
fabricated charge despite satisfactory
explanation submitted by the petitioner.
However, the said impugned order also suffers
from various irregularities and infirmities,
which enables it to be not sustainable in the
eyes of law."
2. At this juncture, this Court would refer to a
judgment rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court
in the case of Babita Kumari v. The State of Bihar and others,
reported in 2016 SCC Online Pat 9434, paragraphs no. 7 and 8
whereof are reproduced herein below:-
"7. Having considered the rival contentions, we
do not find any merit in the present appeal. The
charges against the appellant were very clear as
would be apparent from the show cause dated
22.02.2012, which was issued in light of the
findings in the enquiry report as well as the
relevant documents/registers which were required
to be maintained at the Centre. Reply given by the
appellant, copy of which has been brought on
record, does not indicate any justification and
rather it has been stated that on 24.09.2011 at the
time of Inspection, the children were still coming
and on 07.10.2011, she herself had gone to call
the children and during that time the inspection
was held. It was further stated by the appellant
Patna High Court CWJC No.20527 of 2014 dt.10-08-2023
that on 30.09.2011 she had become ill due to
being drenched by rain. We find that such
explanation is vague and evasive and does not
inspire confidence. The spirit and object of
running Anganbadi Centres cannot be
overemphasized and the purpose is to ensure the
welfare of children from the lowermost and
deprived strata of society. Any lapse in execution
of the said scheme has to be taken very seriously.
Closure of even one day entails the beneficiaries
going without their meals, which cannot be
overlooked. Thus, we do not find any infirmity in
the decision of the authorities cancelling her
selection as well as the procedure adopted by
them prior to passing such order.
8. For the reasons aforesaid, the Letters Patent
Appeal, being devoid of merit, stands dismissed."
3. It would be apt to refer to yet another judgment
rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in the case
of Neetu Kumari v. The State of Bihar and others, reported in
2011 (4) PLJR 20, paragraphs no. 4 and 5 whereof are
reproduced herein below:-
"4. In our considered view, the post of Anganbari
Sevika is not a post having security of tenure or
protection under Article 311 of Constitution of
India. Considering the very nature of engagement
Patna High Court CWJC No.20527 of 2014 dt.10-08-2023
which provides of honorarium, we are of the view
that in case the appellant still feels aggrieved,
she may approach the Civil Court for damages.
There is nothing at stake in such a scheme other
than honorarium. For such contractual
engagements the relief of reinstatement is not
appropriate and even if there is breach of the
scheme or any other principle of law, the claim
should ordinarily be permitted, if found good on
merits, only for damages.
5. The appeal is dismissed."
4. Considering the law laid down by the learned
Division Bench of this Court, as aforesaid, the learned counsel
for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition,
however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such
other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the
law. Liberty, so sought, is granted.
5. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
Ajay/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 11.08.2023
Transmission Date NA
