JATINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for quashing of the impugned order dated 03.07.2012 (Annexure P-7), vide which the petitioner was given an option to resign from one post of either Anganwadi Worker or as Member of the Block Samiti, Radaur, failing which her services would be deemed to have been terminated from the post of Anganwadi Worker. Challenge has also been posed to the order dated 10.12.2012 (Annexure P-12), vide which her services have been dispensed with of an Anganwadi Worker. Petitioner was appointed as an Anganwadi Worker in the year 1988. She continued on the said post when in the elections to the Block Samiti Member, which were held in July, 2010, petitioner participated and was elected as such. She had been granted permission to file nominations for contesting elections vide letter dated 28.11.1994. Subsequently, the petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 03.07.2012 (Annexure P-7), vide which she was called upon to retain any of the two posts either of an Anganwadi Worker or as a Member of the Block Samiti, Radaur.

(2.) Petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP No. 12998 of 2012, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 13.07.2012 by giving liberty to the petitioner to file a representation stating therein that the post of an Anganwadi Worker was not a civil post as the petitioner had relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of State of Karnataka and others v. Ameerbi and others, 2007 11 SCC 681 and Anokh Singh v. Punjab State Election Commission, 2010 4 RCR(Civ) 907 SLP (C) No. 7319 of 2009 decided on 29.10.2010. The said representation of the petitioner was considered by the Director General Women and Child Development Department, Haryana and vide order dated 10.12.2012 (Annexure P-12) although holding the post of an Anganwadi Worker to be not a civil post, proceeded to hold that the duty of an Anganwadi Worker was for the welfare of the people such as health check-up, preschool activity, referral services, nutrition education and supplementary nutrition programme, which would be in conflict with the responsibilities of a Member Block Samiti and, therefore, as the petitioner had not opted for resigning from the post of a Member Block Samiti, her services were terminated. These orders have been challenged by the petitioner i.e. dated 03.07.2012 (Annexure P-7) and dated 10.12.2012 (Annexure P-12) by way of the present writ petition.

(3.) It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that once the post of an Anganwadi Worker is held to be not a civil post, there is no bar to the petitioner continuing with the two posts simultaneously as a Member Block Samiti, Radaur. There is no assertion in the impugned orders that because of the petitioner holding both the posts, the work of any of the posts being adversely affected and, therefore, the impugned orders cannot sustain.