- (1.) THE learned counsel for the State has placed on record the factual report (AnnexureC), wherein it has been stated that total nine Anganwari Sevika were removed by a common order. These all nine candidates preferred separate writ petitions and out of nine petitions, six have been allowed and matter was remanded to the lower authority, who after hearing the candidates passed the order of reinstatement . It is also stated in the report that three matters are pending in the High Court.
(2.) SINCE under identical facts and circumstances, similarly situated persons have been granted full benefit of appointment on the post of Anganwari Sevika and, therefore, even it was the plea of the respondent that appellant was given opportunity of hearing and thereafter order was passed, we deem it proper that there is no justification for keeping the present appellant alone out from the services and, that too, from the post of Anganwari Sevika. It is also clear that this appointment is contractual appointment and, therefore, the appellant will not get any back wages etc. and she will get the requisite emoluments on joining her duties. Furthermore, it is a contractual appointment , therefore, also in case there arises any ground of termination from services of the appellant, the State will be free to pass appropriate order. However, it is made clear that the respondents may not pass the order of termination of services of the appellant, merely because of our above observation. With the above observation and direction, this Letters Patent Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 12th July, 2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No.2552 of 2008 is set aside. The respondents are directed to reappoint the appellant on the post of Anganwari Sevika within a period of one month from today.;