USHA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following relief/reliefs:

(2.) The petitioner was working as Anganwadi Sahayika along with one Smt. Poonam Kumari, Anganwadi Sevika. Poonam Kumari was subjected to disciplinary proceedings in respect of certain allegation. While dealing with the Poonam Kumari's case the petitioner's services have been terminated on 17/6/2015. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of termination dtd. 17/6/2015, petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority passed order in favour of the petitioner on 12/7/2019 with a direction for re-selection of petitioner to the post of Anganwadi Sahayika. Pursuant to the same the petitioner is stated to have reported before the concerned respondent on 22/10/2019. However, she was not provided the post and so also not extended monetary benefits, thus, the petitioner has presented this petition, in questioning the validity of the termination order dtd. 17/6/2015 and Appellate Authority's order dtd. 12/7/2019.Undisputed facts are that petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Sahayika. In respect of disciplinary proceedings against Poonam Kumari, Anaganwadi Sevika, the petitioner's services have been terminated on 17/6/2015. In other words, there is no initiation of inquiry against the petitioner Usha Kumari. The Appellate Authority while passing order on 12/7/2019 ordered for re-select to the post of Anganwadi Sahayika in so far as petitioner is concerned. The Appellate Authority has not pointed out source of power in respect of deciding appeal against order of termination dtd. 17/6/2015 that the petitioner is entitled for re-selection to the post of Anganwadi Sahayika. In other words as Appellate Authority he has to examine validity of termination order and reinstatement only and not re-selection. The respondents have not initiated inquiry against petitioner Usha Kumari in accordance with law. That apart, the Appellate Authority has no jurisdiction for ordering re-selection to the post of Anganwadi Sahayika to the petitioner.

(3.) In the light of these facts and circumstances, the petitioner has made out prima facie case for interference with the order of termination dtd. 17/6/2015 read with the Appellate Authority's order dtd. 12/7/2019. Accordingly, both orders are set aside.