BASANTI DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners vehemently submitted that the present petition has been preferred, mainly for the reasons that an arbitrary, unilateral and capricious order has been passed by respondent no.7 dated December 27, 2008, at Annexure 5 to the memo of present petition, whereby, the services of the present petitioners have been brought to an end and that too, without giving any notice and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that having been appointed in the month of June, 2007 as Anganbari Sevika, the petitioners resumed their duties and worked as such, on the said post. Though they have been paid their salary for one and half year, without being given any opportunity of being heard to them, the services of the petitioners have been brought to an end.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that a very conscious enquiry has been conducted by the representatives of the Member of Legislative Assembly and the Member of Parliament and only thereafter, the services of the petitioners have been brought to an end. The said enquiry is very authentic and, as such, no need of any hearing of the petitioners is required and, therefore, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

(3.) IN the facts of the present case, several points have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners for quashing of the impugned order at Annexure 5 to the memo of present petition, but, suffice it will be for this Court to say that though Annexure 5 and Annexure 6 to the memo of present petition (to the extent to which it apply to the petitioners) are quashed and set aside, only on the ground that they are passed without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. I am keeping rest of the arguments of the petitioners open.