High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Rima Kumari @ Babli Devi vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 25 April, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Rima Kumari @ Babli Devi vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 25 April, 2011
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                         CWJC NO.4972 OF 2008
RIMA KUMARI @ BABLI DEVI, WIFE OF MUKESH KUMAR, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE NEERPUR, POLICE STATION ATHMALGOLA, DISTRICT PATNA
                                VERSUS
   1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATNA
   2. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BARH, DISTRICT PATNA
   3. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, BARH, DISTRICT
      PATNA
   4. SARITA KUMARI, WIFE OF MUTUN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
      BAHADURPUR, POLICE STATION ATHMALGOLA, DISTRICT PATNA
                                *********

2 25/04/2011 This wit application has been filed challenging

the order contained in Annexure-2 by which the

petitioner’s engagement as Aanganbari Sevika has been

terminated by the District Magistrate, Patna.

The ground for termination is at Annexure-3

which is an enquiry held by the Sub Divisional Officer.

The Enquiry Report indicates that the Mukhiya has not

signed on the proceedings by which the petitioner was

selected as an Aanganbari Sevika. The complaint was

made by Sarita Kumari.

The order of the District Magistrate suffers on

two counts; firstly the District Magistrate ought to have

noticed the petitioner, before serving her with an order of

termination. It also suffers on account of the fact that the

Mukhiya ought to have been noticed, who could have

explained as to whether the procedure was correctly

conducted or not. Absence of signature is an important

aspect of the proceeding, but if the proceeding is

otherwise duly conducted and signed by all the other
2

persons concerned, then perhaps the absence of the

signature of the Mukhiya would have been explained by

him and him alone. The District Magistrate ought to have

also call for the records and see for himself as to whether

the selection process was properly conducted.

Counsel for the State submits that there is a

provision of filing of an appeal before the Commissioner

as per the guidelines of the year 2006. However, it would

not be proper for this Court to dismiss this writ

application on the ground that an alternative remedy is

available, especially in view of the fact that the

Commissioner would also have to remand the matter to

the District Magistrate on account of non-fulfilment of

the principles of natural justice.

I thus quash the order dated 22.01.2008 and

the petitioner is directed to file an application before the

District Magistrate, Patna along with a copy of this order

within a period of four weeks from today. The District

Magistrate, Patna may dispose of the application within a

period of three months thereafter after hearing the

petitioner and the Mukhiya.

This writ application is disposed of with the

aforesaid observations and directions.

Anand                                               ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)