D.N. Patel, J. - (1.) THE present petition has been preferred mainly against the order of termination dated 24 May, 2007, whereby, the services of the petitioner, who was working as Anganbari Sahayika, Ararua within the district of Palamau, have been brought to an end, without giving any show cause notice and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.
(2.) IT is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was selected and appointed in accordance with law as Anganbari Sahayika of Village - Ararua within the district of Palamau in the year, 1992 and thereafter, the petitioner was serving honestly, diligently, sincerely and to the satisfaction of the respondents and abruptly, on 24th May, 2007, the services of the petitioner have been brought to an end vide order at Annexure 3 to the memo of petition and that too, without giving any show cause notice and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that never any opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner, prior to termination of the services of the present petitioner. I have heard learned Counsel for the respondents, who has submitted that the petitioner's services have been terminated vide order dated 24 May, 2007 at Annexure 3 to the memo of petition by the Child Development Project Officer, Hariharganj, District - Palamau and it has been stated that there are certain allegations of irregularities against the petitioner and similarly situated other Anganbari Sahayika and, therefore, their services have been terminated. It is further submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondents that looking to the impugned order at Annexure 3 to the memo of petition, it appears that against the present petitioner there were allegations of several irregularities and keeping in mind these irregularities, the services of the present petitioner have been brought to an end and, therefore, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
(3.) HAVING heard learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby quash and set aside the impugned order, passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Hariharganj, District - Palamau dated 24 May, 2007, at Annexure 3 to the memo of petition, for the following facts and reasons: (i) It appears that the present petitioner was working as Anganbari Sahayika from 1992 onwards and she was serving with the respondents to their satisfaction and she was also getting salary from the respondents from 1992 onwards; (ii) It appears that the Child Development Project Officer, Hariharganj, Palamau, has passed an order on 24 May, 2007 that there are several allegations against the present petitioner about the irregularities and, therefore, the services of the petitioner and other similarly situated Anganbari Sahayika/ Sevika have been brought to an end. Looking to this impugned order, it appears that even no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner, prior to termination of her services; (iii) It also appears, looking to the impugned order at Annexure 3 to the memo of petition, that what are the irregularities against the petitioner and how many of them have been proved, have not been referred in the impugned order, at all; (iv) It also appears, looking to the impugned order, that no independent decision has been arrived at by the Child Development Project Officer, Hariharganj, District - Palamau, while terminating the services of the present petitioner. On the contrary, he has relied upon some another officer's letter, which is referred in the impugned order. It has been referred in the said letter that some Director, Social Welfare, Jharkhand, Ranchi, has written some letter dated 11 April, 2007 and on the basis of that letter, there were certain allegations about the irregularities and, therefore, the services of the petitioner have been terminated. Nobody knows what is that letter dated 11 April, 2007 of the Director, Social Welfare, Jharkhand, Ranchi. Never a copy of this letter, upon which reliance has been placed by the Child Development Project Officer, Hariharganj, Palamau, while terminating the services of the petitioner, was given to the petitioner. This also violates the principles of natural justice. Likewise, one more letter dated 15 May, 2007 has also been referred. Looking to this letter, which is at Annexure 2 to the memo of petition, it also refers only allegations and no proof thereof. On the basis of allegations only, services of the petitioner have been terminated, which is highly a dangerous process for termination of the services of the petitioner, who has been serving with the respondents since 1992 onwards. More than one and half decade's services cannot be brought to an end, only on the basis of allegations. There ought to have been notice or charge -sheet; there ought to have been enquiry; there ought to have been an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and then only such services can be brought to an end. Bare allegations cannot be equated with one truth. Looking to Annexure 2 to the memo of petition, which is referred in Annexure 3, both these letters cannot be equated with a fact that whatever allegations were raised by somebody are true and correct and proved. Allegations are one thing and proof of misconduct is altogether another thing. There is no presumption under the eyes of law that whenever there are allegations against the Anganbari Sahayika or Sevika, they are presumed to be true or correct. Never any enquiry was conducted against the petitioner; never the charges were even levelled against the present petitioner, much less, the charges were ever proved by any enquiry. In these set of circumstances, the order, passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Hariharganj, District -Palamau, is absolutely arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice.;