Gita Devi vs State of Jharkhand and Others

R.K. Merathia, J.—This writ petition has been filed for quashing order dated 1.10.2009 under Memo No. 451(annexure 3) issued by the

Deputy Development Commissioner, Deoghar setting aside the appointment of petitioner.

Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted as follows. Petitioner was selected by the Aam Sabha and then by selection

committee and she was appointed as Angan Bari Sevika in Badnadih in the year 2007. Though, she is daughter in the said village, but she is

residing with her husband in that village which will appear from the residential certificate dated 4.5.2006 (annexure 1) and the voter list annexed as

annexure 5 series with supplementary affidavit filed on 30.11.2009. There is no bar that a married daughter residing in the village cannot be

appointed as Angan Bari Sevika. Moreover, Deputy Development Commissioner has got no power to cancel the appointment of the petitioner and

furthermore, no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner before passing the said order. He relied on paragraph 8 of the case reported in

2001 (1) JlJR 237 Smt. Sharda Devi v. State of Bihar and Ors., which reads as follows:

Apart from the fact aforesaid, it is not in dispute that the D.D.C. Bokaro had no jurisdiction to issue order of removal, power being vested with the

Selection Committee, on whose decision, the removal order can be issued by the Child Development Project Officer (C.D.P.O.), that too after

notice and hearing the parties.

On the other hand, Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned State counsel submitted as follows. The petitioner has obtained residential certificate and

affidavit of giving 3 decimal land by her father in order to circumvent the circular dated 2.6.2006 regarding appointment of Angan Bari Sevika. In

view of Clause (G) & (Gha) in the letter dated 2.6.2006 issued by the Secretary, Women and Child Development Department, Angan Bari Sevika

should be permanent resident of the village and therefore, it is provided that daughter-in-law can be appointed but not the daughter.

The voter list cannot be relied for the purpose of proving that petitioner is permanent resident of the village. The impugned order has been passed

by the Deputy Development Commissioner on the basis of inquiry report submitted by the C.D.P.O., Deoghar after hearing all the villagers

including the petitioner and therefore, it cannot be said that in such circumstances, Deputy Development Commissioner has no power to pass

impugned order. Moreover, opportunity of hearing under Clause 16 of the said circular dated 2.6.2006 is contemplated in different situation,

whereas in the present case the appointment of petitioner itself is illegal.

It appears that under Clause 16, opportunity of hearing is to be given before removing Angan Bari Sevika in different situation which is not

applicable in the present case in which the allegation against the petitioner is of obtaining appointment in violation of the prescribed rules and

procedures. It further appears that an inquiry was held in presence of the villagers, in which petitioner was also heard by the C.D.P.O., Deoghar

who found that petitioner was wrongly appointed. Thus, the case of Smt. Sharda Devi (supra) does not help the petitioner fully. However, when

she was already appointed rightly or wrongly, natural justice demands that an opportunity of hearing should have been given to her.

It appears from the said circular dated 2.6.2006 that Angal Bari Sevika should be permanent resident of the village, apparently for the reason

that the permanent resident of the village can perform her duties properly and that there is no bar that a married daughter cannot be selected as

Angan Bari Sevika, if she is permanent resident of the village.

In the circumstances, the matter is remitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar. Petitioner will treat the inquiry report dated 19.3.2008 of the

C.D.P.O., Deoghar and the impugned order dated 1.10.2009 as the show-cause notices. She will file her show-cause before the Deputy

Commissioner, Deoghar within two weeks. The Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar, will hold inquiry into the claim of the petitioner that she is

permanent resident of the village, and after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, will pass a reasoned order within four weeks from the

date of receipt of representation by the petitioner. If he finds that petitioner is permanent resident of the village, he will declare that she is eligible for

taking part in the selection in the next Aam Sabha. But, if he finds that the petitioner is not a permanent resident of that village, he will declare that

petitioner will not be eligible for taking part in the next Aam Sabha.

With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. However, no costs.