BIJLI MAHATO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2012-2-145
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on February 15,2012

Bijli Mahato Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The present petition has been preferred mainly challenging the Order dated 10th October, 2008 (Annexure-3 to the memo of the petition) as well as the order dated 17th September, 2008 (Annexure-4 to the memo of the petition) passed by the respondents for the reason that the services of the petitioner have been terminated without giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Neither the copies of the complaint received from the villagers have been supplied to the petitioner nor an opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner. Thus, both the orders at Annexure-3 and Annexure-4 to the memo of the petition are in gross violation of the principles of natural justice on account of the fact that had an opportunity been given to the petitioner, it could have been pointed out that allegations levelled against her are absolutely false and frivolous. The petitioner was appointed an Anganbari Sevika w.e.f. 3rd September, 2007 and his services have been terminated vide order dated 17th September, 2008 (Annexure-4) and 10th October, 2008 (Annexure-3) without holding any enquiry. Counsel for the respondents submitted that a detailed counter affidavit has been filed and as stated therein, there was some complaints received from the villagers that petitioner is second wife to one Shri Ashutosh Mahato. A detailed enquiry was conducted by the respondents and its report is annexed as Annexure-E to the counter affidavit and on the basis of this report that she is the second wife of Shri Ashutosh Mahato, services of the petitioner have been terminated.
(2.) Having heard both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I, hereby, quash and set aside the order dated 10th October, 2008 and Order dated 17th September, 2008 (Annexure-3 and Annexure-4 to the memo of the petition respectively) passed by the respondents for the following facts and reasons:-- (I) The petitioner was selected for the post of Anganbari Sevika with effect from 3rd September, 2007. She was selected by the Am Sabha of Village Pargana, District-Saraikella-Kharsawan. Her appointment letter is at Annexure-2 to the memo of the petition. (II) Counsel for the petitioner submitted that thereafter, petitioner was working honestly, sincerely, diligently and to the satisfaction of the respondents and she was also paid salary by the respondent-State authorities. (III) It appears that some private complaints were made against the petitioner and this private complaints were enquired into by the respondent authorities. A copy of this private complaint was also not given to the petitioner nor in the so-called enquiry conducted by the respondents petitioner was ever given any opportunity of being heard. (IV) It further appears from the facts of the case, assuming without admitting, that the so-called enquiry, which is at Annexure 'E' to the counter affidavit is a preliminary enquiry, then also before terminating the services of the petitioner at least a notice should have been given by the respondents so that petitioner can point out her defence against the allegations levelled against her. This procedure has also not been followed and purportedly the services of the petitioner have been terminated by Office Order dated 17th September, 2008 (Annexure-4 to the memo of the petition. (V) The respondents State authorities should have kept in mind that whenever services of any employee are to be terminated, at least opportunity of being heard should be given to the said employee. Whenever any enquiry is being conducted against any employee upon the allegations received then the documents on which the respondents-are relying upon should have been supplied to the petitioner. Neither in the enquiry the petitioner was heard nor prior to the termination of the petitioner any notice was given.
(3.) In view of these facts, I, hereby, quash and set aside the Order dated 10th October, 2008 (Annexure-3 to the memo of the petition) as well as the order dated 17th September, 2008 (Annexure-4 to the memo of the petition). This writ petition is allowed and disposed of with the aforesaid observation.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.