ANITA DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Anganbari Sevika w.e.f. 14th June, 2007. Thereafter, she has worked for several months and abruptly, without giving any notice of hearing, the services of the petitioner have been brought to an end vide letter dated 17th December, 2007.

(2.) It is also vehemently submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that abruptly, arbitrarily, whimsically, scrupulously an order has been passed dated 17th December, 2007, wherein, one more letter has been referred bearing letter No. 330 dated 28th November, 2007 and in pursuance of that direction, the Child Development Project Officer, Latehar, has terminated the services of the petitioner. The said letter was never given to the petitioner, but, the petitioner has to apply for the information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and thereafter only, that secret letter was given to the petitioner. The said letter is at Annexure-3/A to the memo of the writ petition. Looking to the said letter also, it appears that privately some complaints were received against the petitioner. Privately some enquiry were conducted, without informing the petitioner and privately a decision has also been taken unilaterally, without giving any notice to the petitioner and abruptly, arbitrarily the services of the petitioner have been terminated. All these actions are violative of principles of natural justice and therefore, both letters dated dated 28th November, 2007 as well as letter issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Latehar dated 17th December, 2007, at Annexures-3/A and Annexure 2 respectively, deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, who has submitted that there was another more suitable candidates available than the petitioner for Anganbari Sevika and therefore, after appointment of the petitioner vide letter dated 14th June, 2007, some complaints were received and thereafter, enquiry was conducted and vide enquiry report dated 19th July, 2007, it has been pointed out that a lady candidate having higher qualification has not given appointment and therefore, the petitioner's services have been brought to an end by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Latehar vide his letter dated 28th November, 2007 bearing letter No. 330 and consequently, a letter was issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Latehar dated 17th December, 2007 and thus, enquiry was also conducted and thereafter, the petitioner's services have been brought to an end and therefore, the petition deserves to be quashed and set aside.