01.08.2012.

Shri Subodh Kathar for the petitioner.

Shri Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Petitioner was working as Anganwadi Karyakarta. On the ground that one Prem Narayan has submitted a complaint with regard to distribution of NSC, under the Ladli Laxmi Yojana, and in the distribution of the amount, petitioner has committed irregularity, services of the petitioner has been terminated by the impugned order - Annexure P/2.

Shri Subodh Kathar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that on the complaint received from Prem Nayaran on 2.1.2012, an inquiry was conducted by the Project Officer on 3.1.2012 behind the back of the petitioner and a report submitted and based on the report, action is taken against the petitioner without notice to her, without hearing the petitioner and as the action is taken on allegations of mis-conduct committed by the petitioner in the distribution of the amount under the Ladli Laxmi Yojana, it is stated that the order is stigmatic in nature and as the same is passed without notice to the petitioner in violation to the principles of natural justice, the order is unsustainable.

It is stated that even under the Scheme pertaining to appointment to the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta, termination can be done only after a proper inquiry is conducted and as the said procedure is not followed, the termination is illegal. Even though Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, by inviting my attention to the complaint received against the 2

petitioner and the inquiry report - Annexures R/3 and R/4, tried to emphasize that the allegations against the petitioner is found to be correct, but the fact remains that on 2.1.2012, one Prem Narayan submitted a complaint with regard to non-payment of amount under the Ladli Laxmi Yojana, on this complaint an inquiry was ordered, which was conducted on the next date i.e... on 3.1.2012, and the impugned order was passed on 4.1.2012. However, before passing the impugned order neither any notice was issued to the petitioner, nor the petitioner heard. That being so, it is a case where action is taken against the petitioner on certain allegations which amounts to misconduct and as the same is done without notice to the petitioner, without hearing her and without following the procedure contemplated under the Scheme - Annexure P/1, the same is unsustainable and on this ground the impugned action has to be quashed. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Order impugned - Annexure P/2 is quashed and respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to join in service and liberty is granted to the respondents to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law.

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJENDRA MENON)

JUDGE

Aks/-