RINKU MONDAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN this appeal was called out, Mr. Indranil Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the Appellants, submitted that he is pressing this appeal only qua the Appellant No. 1 [i. e. Smt. Rinku Mondal Biswas]. He states that he is not pressing the Appeal on behalf of the Appellant No. 2 (Smt. Sarifunnessa ).

(2.) THE facts of this case are that the two Appellants/petitioners (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as the Appellants had come to this Court in a Writ Petition which was registered as W. P. 4953 (W) of 2002, making a grievance that after having been selected as Anganwari workers vide letter dated 15. 11. 2001 and after having been appointed on the basis of Appointment letter issued on the same day, the respondents thereafter issued an Order on 03. 01. 2002 being in the nature of a Notice informing them, inter alia, that they had suppressed their educational qualifications and as such, they were required to show cause as to why their services should no be terminated.

(3.) THE Appellants had stated that they gave their reply immediately but nothing happened and on the contrary, instead of allowing them to join their duties, they were discharged on and from 17. 1. 2002. This was stated by them in Paragraph 7 of the Writ Petition.