Ravi Krishan Kapur, J. - (1.) The grievance of the petitioner is directed against a final order dated 6th September, 2012, rejecting the demand of the petitioner for reinstatement to the post of an Anganwadi worker under Pandua, ICDS Project.
(2.) The brief facts culminating in the filing of the instant petition are as follows:- (a) On 25th January, 2006 a Memorandum being G.O. No. 288-SW/3S-225/05 dated 25th January, 2006 was issued by the Department of Women and Child Development and Social Welfare, Government of West Bengal for recruitment of Anganwadi workers. (b) Clause 7 (b) (ii) of the Memorandum categorically provided that candidates who are graduates would not be eligible for the post of an Anganwadi worker. Moreover, it was expressly stated that, if a graduate suppresses her academic qualification and is selected to the post of an Anganwadi worker, her services could be terminated without assigning any reason. (c) Pursuant to the aforesaid publication, the petitioner applied for the post of an Anganwadi worker. It is alleged by the State respondents that the petitioner suppressed the fact that she was a qualified graduate at the time of filing her application for an Anganwadi worker. Thereafter, the petitioner was selected to the post of an Anganwadi worker. It is further alleged by the State respondents that, before joining the said post the petitioner affirmed an affidavit on 11th October, 2007 before the Executive Magistrate, Hooghly at Chinsurah wherein she specifically stated in Clause 3 of the said affidavit that she was not a graduate. (d) On 8th August, 2007 an appointment letter was issued by the Child Development Project Officer appointing the petitioner as an Anganwadi worker. It is pertinent to mention that Clause 3 and 8 of the appointment letter categorically provided that if at a later stage it is found that the petitioner has made any false declaration in respect of her qualification or otherwise her appointment would be forthwith terminated. (e) Upon receiving a complaint, the State respondents sought information in respect of the qualification of the petitioner from the Bijoy Narayan Mahavidyalaya. By a letter dated 23rd March, 2009, the principal of the College informed the respondent authorities that the petitioner had graduated in the year 2001 from their college. Pursuant to the aforesaid letter, the respondents conducted an enquiry. In terms of an earlier order passed by this Hon'ble High Court a fresh hearing was also held on 31st August, 2012. (f) After conducting a fresh hearing, the concerned authorities issued an order dated 6 September, 2012 ("the order") and terminated the appointment of the petitioner as an Anganwadi worker primarily on the ground that the petitioner had suppressed her educational qualifications and had also given false information regarding her education qualification.
(3.) It is in the background that the instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 6 September, 2012 passed by the respondent authorities. It is pertinent to mention that the reasons enumerated in the order exclusively pertain to the fact that the petitioner had suppressed the real facts before the Office of the Child Development Project Officer and had given false information declaring that she was not a graduate.;