Nagendra Rai, J.

1. The petitioners have filed C.W.J.C. No. 9942/1992 for quashing the order dated 9.9.1992 passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Punpun, cancelling the engagements of the petitioners and restoring the engagements of Renu Kumari and others (writ petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 290 of 1991) in pursuance of an order passed by the higher authorities in terms of the order dated 27.4.1992 passed by this Court in the said writ application, whereby the cancellation of the selection of the writ petitioners of the aforesaid writ application was quashed.

2. Civil Review No. 23 of 1992 has been filed by the petitioners to review the order dated 27.4.1992, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 290 of 1991, by which, as stated above, cancellation of selection as Anganwari Sewika of Renu Kumari and others (petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 290 of 1991) was quashed by this Court, the effect of which is that the subsequent engagements of the writ petitioners in their places stood cancelled by order dated 9.9.1992, as stated above.

3. The petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 9942 of 1992 and Civil Review No.23 of 1993 will be referred to as the writ petitioners and the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 290 of 1991, who are respondents in C.W.J.C. No. 9942 of 1992 and Civil Review No.23 of 1993 will be referred to as the private respondents hereinafter,

4. The facts, which are not in dispute, are that the Government came out with a scheme for providing food to the downtrodden and poor boys as well as the pregnant ladies of the village. The scheme provided for engagement of Anganbari Sewika for working at the Centres created for the said purpose, for which they would be paid honorarium. If the Anganbari Sewika is a Matriculate or having a higher qualification, then she will get honorarium of Rs. 275/- per month and in case of lesser qualification, she will get Rs. 225/- per month. According to the terms of the scheme, only the in-laws of the village as well as daughters, who are alone born from their parents of the village are to be engaged as Anganbari Sewika. No outsider of the village is to be engaged as Anganbari Sewika.

5. It is an admitted position that an advertisement was issued for selection of Anganbari Sewika in different Panchayats of the Punpun Block in the year 1985-1986 and an interview was held. Thereafter, the private respondents were selected as Anganbari Sewika and in terms of the scheme, they were sent for three months training and, thereafter, they were engaged on honorarium at different places in the Panchayats. Annexure-1 series of C.W.J.C. No. 290 of 1991 are the office orders of engagement of the private respondents as Anganbari Sewika, which provide for payment of honorarium and three months training. It is further provided therein that no other allowances will be admissiblp and in case of their services being not found satisfactory, they will be disengaged without any information.

6. The higher authorities visited several times at the places of engagements of the private respondents and found most of them absent from duty. They were not even discharging their duties assigned to them and, thereafter, show-cause notices were issued to them, but inspite of service of notice, they did not file any show-cause and, thereafter, they were disengaged by order dated 13.2.1989 of the Deputy Director, Social Welfare, Patna Division, and the said order of termination or disengagement was communicated to them by the concerned officer on 18.2.1989. Thereafter, a fresh advertisement and selection was made and the writ petitioners were engaged in their places. The said two orders were challenged by the private respondents in C.W.J.C. No. 290 of 1991. In the said case, the writ petitioners were impleaded as private respondents and it was clearly stated in the writ application at paragraphs no.23 and 24 that after their disengagement, the writ petitioners were appointed and they also challenged their subsequent engagements. However, when the