ARUNA YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred against the order passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Mohanpur, District Deoghar dated 8th July, 2009 which is at Annexure4 to the memo of the petition, whereby, long tenure of the services of the petitioner as Anganbari Sevika have been brought to an end that too withing giving any show cause notice and without any inquiry and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and that too by thoroughly a nonspeaking order and, hence, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the impugned order.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reasons cannot be given in the counter affidavit. The reasons must be given in the impugned order, itself. The impugned order is not giving any reason, whatsoever, against the petitioner and, therefore, subsequently filed counter affidavit is of no help to the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill and another v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and others, reported in (1978) 1 SCC 405.

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby quash and set aside the order passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Mohanpur, District Deoghar dated 8th July, 2009 at Annexure4, mainly for the following facts and reasons: