Smt. Suman Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court CWJC No.2777 of 2013 (2) dt.08-02-2013 2 is bad because the impugned order of removal of the petitioner from service was passed subsequently on 27.8.2012 but a decision for her removal had already been taken on 10.7.2012. In support of such submission he has placed reliance on the letter of the Child Development Project Officer, Pipra, Supaul, as contained in Annexure 5. From perusal of the said letter of the C.D.P.O. it is, however, clear that there was no such decision for terminating the service of the petitioner rather on finding unsatisfactory functioning of the centre of the petitioner and others while the concerned Anganwari Supervisors were under the process of being issued show cause notice, the District Programme Officer in order to keep the centre functioning had directed for its being attached to the nearer centre. That letter of the C.D.P.O. dated 10.7.2012 cannot be the evidence of bias and pre-determined attitude of the District Programme Officer. Learned counsel next submitted that the appellate order is a cryptic order, inasmuch as the petitioner’s number of contentions raised in the Memo of Appeal have not at all been answered by the Collector while dismissing the appeal of the petitioner. This Court finds merits in such contention, inasmuch as from the Memo of Appeal it would be apparent that the petitioner Patna High Court CWJC No.2777 of 2013 (2) dt.08-02-2013 3 had raised a number of grounds including grounds no. 5 to 12, which reads as follows: “5. That no any copy of inspection report submitted by enquiry officer Ld. D.P.O. Supaul has ever been served to appellant.

6. That no any adverse report or complaint has been done against the appellant since joining till today.

7. That no any beneficiary has ever reported regarding non receipt or lesser receipt of THR as well as Poshahar.

8. That Ld. D.P.O., Supaul ought not pass any order to C.D.P.O. Pipra against the appellant before being heard for the same but he passed such order reflecting his decision which is completely erroneous in the eye of law.

9. That so far allegation no.1, regarding presence of buffalo chauki and cattle feed at the centre concerned, it is to be submitted that those were kept by the side of Centre since Centre was running at temporarily shifted place with prior information to O/o C.D.P.O., Pipra for last 5 days as original house of Centre was badly hit and damaged due to effect of storm.

10. That so far allegation no.2 regarding non display of Board is concerned, it is to be submitted that Board was being airswept in storm since its make of Bamboo wood was old. A new Board was displayed later on original on house of Centre after being shifted there.

11. That so far allegation no.3 regarding lesser Patna High Court CWJC No.2777 of 2013 (2) dt.08-02-2013 4 presence of children at the time of inspection is concerned, it is to be submitted that due to running of centre at new temporary place as well as Sabebarat festival, lesser children arrived at that day. Occurrence of major road accident a day before inspection gave a panic effect in children also due to which lesser children arrived.

12. That copy of THR distribution register containing signature/ thumb impression regarding receipt of THR by all beneficiaries with village officers comments, not assessed at all, is attached here with for your kind alrused which can be well verified again.” From the impugned order of the Collector it, however, does not transpire that anyone of these grounds were even taken into account much less remotely considered, inasmuch as only consideration in this regard which can be found in the appellate order of the Collector of Supaul reads as follows: “fnukad 09-10-2012 dks lquokbZ ds dze esa vihykFkhZ ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dks lquk A vihykFkhZ dh vksj ls dksbZ u;k rF; izLrqr ugh fd;k x;k A mDr dsUnz dk ewy fujh{k.k iath ds voyksdu ls Hkh izrhr gksrk gS fd mDr dsUnz ij cPpksa dh mifLFkfr izk;% de jgrh gS ftlds vkyksd esa mUgsa lEeu Hkh fd;k x;k gS A lquokbZ ds dze esa mifLFkr ftyk dk;Zdze inkf/kdkjh v0bZ0lh0Mh0,l0] lqikSy }kjk vius vkns’k dks lgh Bgjk;k x;k A bl izdkj vfHkys[k esa miyC/k dkxtkrksa ds voyksdu ls Li’V gS fd vihykFkhZ Jherh lqeu dqekjh }kjk fu/kkZfjr ekudksa ds vuq:i dsUnz dk lapkyu ugh fd;k x;k rFkk dsUnz ds lapkyu esa /kksj ykijokgh cjrh x;h ftlds vkyksd esa viuk i{k j[kus dk ekSdk fn, tkus ds mijkar ftyk dk;Zdze inkf/kdkjh] Patna High Court CWJC No.2777 of 2013 (2) dt.08-02-2013 5 vkbZ0lh0Mh0,l0] lqikSy }kjk p;ueqfDr dk vkns’k ikfjr fd;k x;k gS A vr% mijksDr ds vkyksd esa vihykFkhZ p;ueqDr lsfodk Jherh lqeu dqekjh ds vihy vkosnu dks vLohd‘r djrs gq, ftyk izksxzke inkf/kdkjh] vkbZ0lh0Mh0,l0] lqikSy ds vkns’k Kkikad 1240@izks0 fnukad 27-08-2012 }kjk fuxZr vkns’k dks lEiq"V fd;k tkrk gSA” It is true that the appellate authority is not required to pass lengthy reasoned order but when in the Memo of Appeal certain issues are raised, the appellate authority is under obligation to at least consider them and pass his reasoned order. In absence thereof the appeal becomes a mere formality. In the present case also when the petitioner had raised a grievance of non-supply of the enquiry report or that the reason for presence of lesser number of beneficiaries at the centre on the date of inspection of the District Programme Officer the appellate authority was required to apply his mind and give reasons for either accepting or rejecting them. That having been not done this Court must hold the cryptic and non-speaking appellate order to be vitiated both on fact and in law. In the result, the appellate order passed by the Collector is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Collector of Supaul District to pass a fresh order after affording opportunity Patna High Court CWJC No.2777 of 2013 (2) dt.08-02-2013 6 of hearing to the petitioner. This exercise must be completed by the Collector of Supaul District within a period of four months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J) surendra/-