Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for quashing order dated 26.08.2011 issued by C.D.P.O in pursuance to letter dated 08.08.2011 issued by District Social Welfare Officer, Chatra pertaining to termination of the petitioner from services.
(2.) Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Sweta Singh, J.C to G.A., learned counsel appearing for the respondents -state.
(3.) Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner, who possesses all requisite qualification, was selected on the post of Sahayika by Aam Sabha and her selection was confirmed by the C.D.P.O vide letter dated 30.08.2009. Pursuant thereto, she continued to discharge her duties to the utmost satisfaction of the authorities. But, to the utter dismay, she was slapped with a show cause dated 30.03.2001 (Annexure 6) by District Social Welfare Officer, Chatra contending therein that as to why her selection may not be terminated since she is not a permanent resident of Pariyadih and was asked to submit her reply within three days. In compliance thereof, the petitioner submitted her reply stating therein that in the residential certificate issued by the C.O, Pratappur, it is clearly mentioned that she is permanent resident of village Sidiki and Pariyadih is a part (Tola) of Sidiki, as Sidiki became thickly populated area then Sidiki -Pariyadih was formed. So she belongs to Pariyadih, which is part of Sidiki. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that thereafter second show cause dated 28.04.2010 was issued by the respondents - authorities only to fill up the lacuna and even the residential certificate issued way back was cancelled. However, the petitioner replied to the said show cause justifying her selection and submitted that she belongs to Passhak Chhetra (Feeder Area) and the residential certificate, which was issued long back ought not to have been cancelled without giving any show notice to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents -authorities without taking any recourse of law and without making proper enquiry terminated the services of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 26.08.2011.;