LAXMIPRIYA ROUTRAY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ application with the following prayer:-

(2.) Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the CDPO, Delang the petitioner was engaged as Anganwadi Worker of Haladigoroda Centre under the Delang block of Puri district in the year 2010. While working as such, basing on certain allegations of misappropriation of food-stuff as reported by the CDPO, the petitioner was disengaged from her duties with effect from 26/5/2014 as per order passed by the Sub-Collector, Puri. The petitioner having submitted a grievance petition before the government, the Collector, Puri was instructed to inquire into the matter. The inquiry was conducted by the CDPO, Delang and a report was submitted on 22/3/2021 whereby, the allegation of misappropriation of rice was proved. The petitioner submitted a representation to the Sub-Collector, Puri for her re-engagement purportedly on the ground that the inquiry report was in her favour. Since no action was taken, the petitioner approached this Court in WP(C) No.33787 of 2021. By order dtd. 12/11/2021, this Court granted liberty to the Petitioner to prefer appeal before the Appellate Authority. Accordingly, the Petitioner preferred appeal before the Collector, Puri being registered as Anganwadi Misc. Appeal Case No.3 of 2022. After considering the rival contentions and in particular, the inquiry reports submitted by the CDPO, the Collector by order dtd. 17/1/2022, found no reason to interfere with the order of disengagement and accordingly, the appeal was dismissed. Challenging such action, the Petitioner has filed this writ petition with the prayer as quoted above.

(3.) Stand of the State as reflected in the counter affidavit filed by Opposite Party Nos.3 and 4 is that the Petitioner was engaged as Anganwadi worker by order dtd. 8/9/2010. While working as such, the then CDPO, Delang received allegation from the villagers of Haladigoroda Anganwadi Centre on 24/5/2014 regarding illegal sale of rice meant for the Anganwadi Centre. A field inquiry was conducted by the CDPO along with Supervisor, Delang on 24/5/2014, wherein it was found that the Petitioner had misappropriated Q 51.200 of rice meant for the children of the Anganwadi Centre. The Petitioner also admitted before the CDPO and Supervisor as also the villagers that she had sold the said rice meant for the children. Accordingly, the Petitioner was asked to show cause on the same day, that is, 24/5/2014 as to why she shall not be disengaged. The matter was also reported in the newspaper on the next day. The Petitioner submitted her reply on 26/5/2014 wherein she took the plea that because of lack of space in the Anganwadi Centre she had kept the rice in her house and that the rice sold by her husband actually belonged to her family. The allegations were false. The Sub-Collector, however, did not find her explanation satisfactory and disengaged her by order dtd. 27/5/2014. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. After hearing the Petitioner and other authorities, the Collector, found that the Petitioner could not show any documentary evidence or proof that the seized rice belonged to her family and moreover, she had herself admitted her guilt. Accordingly, the order of the Sub-Collector was upheld by the Collector in the order dtd. 6/2/2015.