Urmila Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

For the State : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, A.A.G. 12, Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan, Advocates Ms. Priya Gupta, A.C. to A.A.G.12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 2 08-07-2013 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated

19.04.2012 (Annexure 3) passed by the District Programme Officer, Nalanda by which she has been removed/terminated from the post of Anganwari Sahaika as well as the appellate order dated

11.10.2012 (Annexure 4) passed by the District Magistrate, Nalanda by which her appeal has been dismissed and the order passed by the respondent no.3 has been upheld. Though the writ application has been filed on 3rd of 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.22161 of 2012 (2) dt.08-07-2013 December, 2012, no counter affidavit has been filed till date. However, in view of the nature of order which is going to be passed in this case, the same is being considered without waiting further for filing of the counter affidavit. A short issue has been raised on behalf of the petitioner that there is no consideration of the grounds raised by the petitioner in her reply to the show cause notice in the order impugned. I find force in the submission raised by the petitioner that though the District Programme Officer has noted that petitioner has filed her explanation along with the evidence but he has not considered the same and rejected the grounds raised therein without recording any reason or finding. He has simply stated that the explanation is dissatisfactory which would not be sufficient. The submission raised on behalf of the State that the appellate authority appears to have considered everything is also only noted to be rejected in view of the fact that the illegality committed by the original authority cannot be rectified at the appellate stage. A reference in this regard is made to a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in M/s. Umesh Chandra Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and other 1999(1) BLJ, 548. Accordingly, this writ application is allowed. The 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.22161 of 2012 (2) dt.08-07-2013 impugned orders as contained in Annexures 3 and 4 are quashed and set aside. However, it is made clear that this order would not come in way of the authorities if they wish to proceed against the petitioner in a manner permissible in law. Sanjay-II/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)