VINITA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned order as contained in Office Order issued vide Memo No. 501 dated 18th Sept., 2008 issued under the signature of the Deputy Development Commissioner, Deoghar by which the services of the petitioner working as Anganwari Sevika at the Anganwari Centre, Mungjori under Sarwa Block has been terminated and further for a direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner to the post of Anganwari Sevika at Centre Mungjori under Sarwa Block and to pay all the honorarium for the period during which the petitioner has been kept out of service.

(2.) Sans details, the facts, as disclosed and delineated in the writ petition, are that on 25.05.2007, a meeting was held in the Primary School at Village Mungjori Panchayat Basbutia Block-Sarwa, District-Deoghar for the selection of Anganwari Sevika/Sayika in which the members of Selection Committee and the villagers participated and the aforesaid meeting was presided over by the Block Agricultural Officer, Sarwa Block and the villagers of the Village-Mungjorio actively participated in the aforesaid meeting for selection of Anganwari Sevika/Sayika. It has been further averred that in all there were four candidates, namely, Geeta Devi, Santana Kumari, Vinita Kumar (petitioner) and Baby Devi. After the Aam Sabha, the petitioner was unanimously selected for the post of Anganwari Sevika because she fulfilled the requisite Matriculation Qualification and having Annual Income of Rs.24,000.00 only below the poverty line. Another contesting candidate Santana Kumari was not selected because her husband Panchanand Verma is a Para Teacher in the same village in a Government Primary School and their Annual Income was above poverty line. Since there was doubt on the genuineness of the mark sheet supplied by Santana Kumari, she was not selected as Anganwari Sevika for which, the said Santana Kumari filed W.P. (S) No. 2063 of 2008, which was later on withdrawn vide order dated 29.11.2008, passed by this Court. The petitioner was provided the provisional selection letter by the Child Development Project Officer, mentioning therein that by the Aam Sabha convened on 25.5.2007, the petitioner has been selected for the Anganwari Sevika Centre-Mungjori. Thereafter, the petitioner was given the appointment letter vide Memo No. 284 dated 9.6.2007 issued under the signature of Child Development Project Officer, Block Sarwa, Deoghar, mentioning, inter alia, that the petitioner has been selected for the post of Anganwari Sevika for Mungjori Centre with certain conditions. The petitioner thereafter joined her duties on the post of Anganwari Sevika with effect from 10.06.2007 and satisfactorily discharged her duties to the satisfaction of her superior officers but surprisingly and to the utter consternation of the petitioner, due to certain dispute raised by one Santana Kumari, later on and only with an intention to accommodate the said Santana Kumari, the services of the petitioner was terminated vide order as contained in Memo No. 501 dated 18.09.2008 issued under the signature off the Deputy Development Commissioner, Deoghar. The only ground mentioned in the termination letter for terminating the services of the petitioner is that she is not a permanent resident of village- Mungjori but as a matter of fact, the petitioner is a permanent resident of the said Mungjori village and she has submitted her residential certificate and the caste certificate issued by the competent authority. The husband of the petitioner, namely, Binod Kumar Verma and also the father-in-law and the petitioner herself are having voting rights in the same Mungjori Village and the voter identity cards have been issued by the competent authority after full verification. Although the petitioner's father-in-law settled at his in-laws place since long because of the fact that his wife had no brother and the father-in-law of the petitioner got all the property of his in-laws and he settled there since substantial length of period. The husband of the petitioner has studied since his childhood in village Mungjori itself because of the fact that they have got no property elsewhere and they are permanent resident of village Mungjori itself. All the revenue receipts and Jamabandi receipts are also running in the name of petitioner's father-in-law which clearly go to show that the petitioner is a permanent resident of village Mungjori because she has been married to the son of Tufani Verma, who happens to be the father-in-law of the petitioner. Only with an intention to accommodate some other candidate, the appointment of the petitioner has been terminated by manipulating documents and records with mala fide intention which cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The termination of the services of the petitioner, when she is permanent resident off Mungjori Village under Sarwa Block of Deoghar District amounts to infringement of her fundamental rights as contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The impugned order issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Deoghar on the basis of wrong and incorrect report of the Circle Officer, is wholly mala fide, arbitrary and in flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice. The impugned order of termination of the petitioner has been issued only with an intention to accommodate another candidate, namely, Santana Kumari, who was not selected on the earlier occasion along with this petitioner and who wields immense political and administrative clout. Left with no other efficacious, alternative and speedy remedy, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances.

(3.) Heard Mr. Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Chandra Prabha, learned S.C. IV for the Respondent-State.