INDIRA DEVI MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that petitioner was appointed as "Aanganbadi Karyakarta ", vide order dated 18.07.1995(Annexure-1), passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Nadoti, District Sawai Madhopur. Her services were terminated by the respondent No.3-The Child Development and Project Officer, Nadoti, vide order dated 18.08.2011(Annexure-2). As per averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner filed a representation before the respondent No.3 on 22.08.2011(Annexure-5) against her termination order. She further filed a representation(Annexure-6) dated 19.09.2011 before the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, but the same were not decided. Thereafter, petitioner preferred the present writ petition with a prayer that respondents may be directed to reinstate the petitioner on the post of "Aanganbadi Karyakarta ".

(3.) I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned order as well as documents, referred during the course of arguments and annexed with the writ petition and reply to writ petition.