VEENA DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26.08.2009, Annexure-6, passed by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Dhanbad, by which her appointment as Anganbari Sevika has been rejected on the ground that she has moved under above poverty line category. As per the departmental guidelines, a candidate of above poverty line category is not entitled for such appointment.

(3.) Earlier the petitioner had occasioned to move this Court in WPS. No.1424 of 2008 against her discharge from service as Anganbari Sevika. In the said writ petition the petitioner has assailed the earlier order of discharge from service dated 12.02.2008 as being arbitrary and in violation of the principle of natural justice after five months of appointment to the said post. By the said impugned order dated 12.02.2008 the petitioner was discharged from service. The said discharge apparently was made after an inquiry on receipt of complaint regarding the selection process. The learned Single Bench of this Court, in such circumstances, after hearing the parties, quashed the order of discharge on the ground that there were no documents to indicate that the said inquiry was conducted in presence of the parties. The respondents-authorities were allowed liberty to conduct a fresh inquiry into the complaint against the petitioner after giving adequate opportunity of hearing in respect of her selection and appointment to the post of Anganbari Sevika. The said inquiry was directed to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter, the respondents initiated an inquiry proceeding in which the petitioner was noticed to appear. The proceedings of the said inquiry are enclosed as Annexure-A/1 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. The respondents had also adjourned the matter during course of inquiry on repeated time being sought for or in the absence of the petitioner for giving her enough opportunity. Further notices were also issued on 19.06.2009, which is Annexure-A/1 to the counter affidavit indicating therein that the petitioner should participate in the said inquiry, failing which it would be taken that she has to take no defence. It was also followed by another notice dated 01.07.2009.