Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard Sri J.N. Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of Sri H.P. Mishra, Advocate, for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents.
(2.) Appointment of petitioner as Anganbari Karyakatri made vide order dated 21.04.1998 on contractual basis has been cancelled by order dated 06.07.1998 by District Programme Officer, Azamgarh on the ground that income certificate of the petitioner dated 31.03.1998 was cancelled vide order dated 02.07.1998 by Tehsildar Sadar Azamgarh, hence petitioner was not below poverty line. It is pointed out that subsequently Tehsildar, Sadar, Azamgarh by order dated 09.11.1998 has cancelled his order dated 02.07.1998 and restored income certificate dated 31.03.1998. Therefore, the very basis of cancellation of appointment of petitioner disappears, therefore impugned order cancelling petitioner's appointment is liable to be set aside. The documents on record clearly show these facts. The cancellation order, therefore, cannot be sustained, but the fact remains that petitioner's appointment was made on contract basis with honorarium of Rs. 500/- per month and it was liable to be terminated at any point of time. If that be so, it is not governed by any statutory rule. That being so, no direction for reinstatement in the matter of service can be issued.
(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner argued that a writ petition against termination of an Anganbari Karyakatri is maintainable and relied on a Full Bench decision in Smt. Sheela Devi and another Vs. State of U.P. and others (Special Appeal No. 1121 of 2005) wherein referred question was answered by Full Bench vide order dated 28.05.2010. We find that issue raised before the Full Bench was, "whether a writ petition under Article 226 filed by an Anganbari Karyakatri against her termination is maintainable or not. Full Bench held that though an Anganbari Karyakatri is appointed under a scheme of Government and does not hold any civil post, but a writ petition under Article 226 against the order of termination passed by Child Development Project Officer, a government functionary, would be maintainable on the grounds available for judicial review. The aforesaid Full Bench judgment, therefore, nowhere says that if the order of termination is found to be incorrect, relief of reinstatement can be granted to a contractual appointee like Anganbari Karyakatri, whose appointment is not governed by Statute and is founded only on a contract.;