DULESARA DEVI Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who was an Aanganbari Sevika, was removed by virtue of an order passed by the District Programme Officer contained in Annexure-4. This order is dated 30th of June, 2012. The reason for removal of the petitioner is said to be irregularities found on inspection of the center by the Senior Deputy Collector on 15th of February, 2012. The center was purportedly inspected at about 12.50 p.m. Petitioner's explanation did not find favour and, therefore, the order of removal. An appeal was filed against the decision before the Collector, Bhabua, who too rejected the appeal in a mechanical fashion without taking into consideration the explanation offered by the petitioner. Petitioner has indicated through official document that on 15th of February, 2012, the center was inspected by the CDPO, which can be certified by a look of Annexure-4. This inspection was carried out at about 10.25 am and nothing adverse was reported as would be evident from the noting in the inspection report. Obviously, when the second inspection was held at the time of closing of the center, no activity would be found, that is what was reported, on which action has been taken. It is evident even from the second inspection that the petitioner was present though the children etc. were not present looking at the time of inspection and the Sahayika was on training, therefore, was absent.

(2.) From a reading of the order of the District Programme Officer as well as the-District Magistrate, it is evident that all these aspects were not taken into consideration at all.

(3.) Though the CDPO has filed a counter affidavit, she has not denied the authenticity of Annexure-4. If that be so, then the punishment of removal of the petitioner was uncalled for and extreme decision taken in the background of two conflicting reports and inspection.