URMILA SAHU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition with the following prayer;

(2.) The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The Petitioner was engaged as Asha worker under the C.D.M.O., Kalahandi in June, 2005. On 9/6/2012 a complaint was submitted by one Gouranga Majhi alleging that his wife Jira Majhi had delivered a still born child because of negligence and dereliction of duty by the Petitioner. After about a year, i.e. on 9/7/2013, the Petitioner was called upon by the CDMO, Kalahandi, to show cause as to why appropriate disciplinary action should not be taken against her for such negligence in duty. In her reply submitted on 23/8/2013, the Petitioner stated all the facts in detail specifically taking the ground that being intimated at 1.30 A.M. about the onset of labour pain of the complainant's wife, she had tried her level best to contact the Janani Express to shift the patient to the Hospital, but without success. She therefore, suggested to hire a private vehicle for the purpose whereupon the family members of the patient demanded Rs.2,000.00 from her. Since no funds had been allotted to her she could not pay them. She also brought it to the notice of the Medical Officer in writing on the next day. In the meantime instead of heeding to the advice of the Petitioner, the family of the patient got the delivery conducted through a local Kabiraj, which ultimately led to delivery of a still born girl child. Upon receipt of the reply of the Petitioner as above, the CDMO in his letter dtd. 26/9/2013 stated that the reply submitted by the Petitioner was not acceptable but warned her to be committed to her work as Asha worker. It was further given out that she would be under observation for one month and unless her performance improved, action would be taken against her. While the matter stood thus, the Collector in his letter dtd. 19/10/2013, purportedly acting on the direction of the Odisha Human Rights Commission (OHRC) in OHRC Case No.2590/2012, directed the CDMO to take steps for disengagement of the Petitioner. Pursuant to such letter, the CDMO issued appropriate instructions to the Medical Officer of C.H.C., Junagarh, who, vide letter dtd. 8/11/2013 passed order disengaging the Petitioner. Further, a fresh advertisement for selection of new Asha worker for the same Sub-centre was issued. It is stated that the Petitioner was never a party before the OHRC nor in the inquiry conducted pursuant to its directions. As such, the impugned order of disengagement is in violation of the principles of natural justice.

(3.) Counter affidavit has been filed by the State-Opposite Parties (Opp.Party Nos.3 and 4) seeking to justify the action taken against the Petitioner. It is stated that the Petitioner was negligent in her duty which resulted in delivery of a dead child and therefore, she was rightly disengaged. Moreover, the complainant Gouranga Majhi had brought the entire facts to the notice of the OHRC and a direction to conduct inquiry was issued to the Collector. The CDMO, Kalahandi, through the ADMO conducted the enquiry wherein the negligence in duty of the Petitioner was proved.