Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 09.07.2014, passed in Case No.58 of 2014, by the Deputy Director, Welfare, Patna Division, Patna, i.e. the respondent no.2, herein, whereby and whereunder the appeal, filed by the petitioner has been rejected. The petitioner has also challenged the original order dated 20.03.2014, passed by the District Program Officer, Patna i.e. the respondent no.3, whereby and whereunder the services of the petitioner as Anganwari Sevika has been terminated.

2. The brief facts of the petitioner, according to the petitioner are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Anganwari Sevika vide office order dated 15.06.1983, issued by the Child Development Programme Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna, whereafter she had joined her services on 27.06.1983, as Anganwari Sevika in ward no.25/29, Patna i.e. in Anganwari Center Hazari Mohalla Code No.26.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that subsequently, the services of the petitioner was transferred at Gaighat where she had submitted her joining in the year 1990. It is also stated that on 31.07.2013, the Child Development Project Officer had made a surprise inspection at 12:40 P.M. and some irregularities were found, whereafter the District Programme Officer, Patna had sought explanation from the petitioner vide letter dated 22.10.2013, to which the petitioner had submitted her explanation on 28.10.2013 and then the impugned order dated 20.03.2014 was passed by the District Programme Officer, Patna, terminating the services of the petitioner from the post of Anganwari Sevika. The petitioner had then filed an appeal bearing Anganwari Appeal No.58 of 2014, however, the same has been rejected by an order dated 09.07.2014, passed by the Deputy Director, Welfare, Patna Division, Patna.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the time table, annexed to the present writ petition as annexure-4, the time prescribed for running an Anganwari Center in between the period April to October is upto 12:30 P.M., however, the inspection was made at 12:40 P.M., thus no children were present in the said center and the petitioner was not present there, hence it is submitted that the very basis for initiating the aforesaid proceedings and terminating the services of the petitioner is itself faulty and misconceived, hence the impugned orders dated 20.03.2014 and 09.07.2014 are fit to be set aside.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent- State has supported the impugned orders dated 20.03.2014 and 09.07.2014 and has submitted that gross irregularities have been committed by the petitioner in running the Centre in question. It is further submitted that a bare perusal of the time table annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition would show that the timing prescribed for operating the Anganwadi Centre, in the month of April to October, is 9 AM to 1 PM, hence it is false on the part of the petitioner to contend that the timing of the Anganwadi Centre is only upto 12:30 PM. It is also submitted that several irregularities were found during the course of inspection held at the center in question on 31.07.2013, inasmuch as neither any child was present at the center nor meal had been prepared nor there was ample empty space for the children to move around nor the petitioner was present at the center, nor registers were maintained in the prescribed format, nor the THR for the month of July, 2013 had been distributed nor children day was being celebrated and moreover, social audit was also not being done.

6. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent-State that in view of the aforesaid irregularities, a show cause notice dated 22.10.2013, was issued to the petitioner and after obtaining her reply, the District Programme Officer, Patna by a reasoned and a speaking order dated 20.03.2014, had terminated the services of the petitioner as an Anganwadi Sevika. The p