J R PANDIT Vs. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution demonstrates the arbitrary and illegal order passed by the respondent/District Panchayat retiring the petitioner, a Lady Social Educational Organizer (Mukhya Sevika), compulsorily, on the alleged extraneous ground of sickness with retrospective effect, without authority of law and without affording opportunity of hearing and thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed in the year 1961 as a Lady Social Educational Organizer (Mukhya Sevika) by the respondent and posted at Taluka level office under the District Panchayat. After considering her sincerity, efficiency and good service record, she was appointed on the post of Assistant Child Welfare Organizer by the respondent by order dated March 6, 1987 and posted at Dediapada. On account of her sickness, she took charge at Dediapada on November 21, 1987 after producing fitness certificate issued by the Neurologist, Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad. The petitioner thereafter continued to work at Dediapada as an Assistant Child Welfare Organizer. As she remained sick, she had availed leave from February 17, 1989 to February 24, 1989. Thereafter when she went to resume duties on February 27, 1989 she was not permitted to work by the Child Welfare Organizer but she was informed vide letter dated March 9, 1989, a copy of which is annexed at Annexure A, to remain present in the meeting in respect of Family Welfare Programme to be held on March 15, 1989 and accordingly the petitioner had attended the said meeting.

(3.) Thereafter the petitioner received a letter dated June 6, 1989 written by the Child Welfare Organizer, Dediapada, informing her that she was declared unfit to discharge her duties by the Civil Surgeon, Bharuch, vide certificate dated April 3, 1989 and as per the discussion with the District Development Officer on June 5, 1989, she should not come to discharge her duties at the office or visit any centre. A copy of the said letter dated June 6, 1989 is annexed at Annexure B. According to the petitioner, the said certificate dated April 3, 1989 alleged to have been issued by the Civil Surgeon, Bharuch was to the effect that the petitioner was fit for less laborious service than the service performed by her. The said certificate is annexed at Annexure C. The petitioner gave a reply dated June 16, 1989 informing the Child Welfare Officer that he was not the competent authority to restrain her from discharging her duties and hence till the competent authority passes an order for invalidity pension, she would remain in service. It is further say of the petitioner that as she has not been paid salary since March 1989, she has filed Regular Civil Suit No.21 of 1989 in the Civil Court (J.D.)., Dediapada against the respondent for the recovery of her salary for two months and for injunction restraining the respondent from stopping the salary payable to her every month. The said suit is still pending.