The central legal point established in the judgment is that administrative decisions with civil consequences must comply with the principles of natural justice, including the rule of audi alteram partem. Additionally, a proper enquiry, as defined by the Supreme Court, must be conducted before terminating a member of the Committee.

JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition has been filed calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of order dated 13/11/2020 (Annexure P/1) issued by respondent No. 1 by which petitioner’s appointment on the post of Chairperson, Child Welfare Committee, Rajnandgaon has been terminated.

2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop :-

2.1. It is the case of the petitioner that she had applied for the post of Chairperson, Child Welfare Committee, Rajnandgaon and after verification of her documents and after conducting her interview, by following proper selection procedure, the selection list was published on 02/11/2020 (Annexure P/3) and petitioner got selected for the said post. She gave her joining on the said post on 04/11/2020 (Annexure P/4), but thereafter, on 13/11/2020 (Annexure P/1), the impugned order has been passed by respondent No. 1 terminating her services without even issuing show cause notice and without conducting any enquiry as mandated by Section 27(7) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter, ‘the Act of 2015’). As such, the impugned order (Annexure P/1) is absolutely arbitrary and is violative of principles of natural justice as petitioner’s service has been terminated on alleged ground of misuse of power which has been concluded without conducting any enquiry and without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

2.2. It is further the case of the petitioner that in the enquiry report dated 12/11/2020 (Annexure R/1) submitted by the Collector (District Child Protection Unit) (Integrated Child Protection Scheme), Women and Child Development Department, Rajnandgaon before the Secretary of the Department, it has been alleged that petitioner was earlier appointed as Member of the Juvenile Justice Board, District Rajnandgaon vide order dated 27/04/2016 wherein she did not perform her duties and abruptly resigned and as such, she cannot be appointed again and on that basis her services have been terminated, which is contrary to the provisions contained under Section 27(7) of the Act of 2015 as enquiry has to be made before terminating the service of any member of the Committee on the grounds enumerated in clauses (i) to (iii) of Section 27(7) of the Act of 2015, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed.

3. Return has been filed by the respondents/State stating inter alia that appointment of the petitioner is provisional/temporary in nature and as per the terms and conditions enumerated in her appointment order, her services can be terminated at any point of time as per the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Board (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 as well as the Juvenile Justice Board (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2016 if she is found guilty of misuse of power during her tenure.

4. Ms. Aditi Singhvi, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that petitioner was appointed on the post of Chairperson, Child Welfare Committee in accordance with law after undergoing the due selection procedure and she has abruptly been terminated from service on 13/11/2020 (Annexure P/1) without affording her an opportunity of hearing and without conducting any enquiry as required under Section 27(7) of the Act of 2015. Section 27(7) of the Act of 2015 clearly contemplates conducting an enquiry before terminating any member of the Committee. The petitioner ought to have been issued show cause notice along with the list of documents and after conducting due enquiry, the impugned order could have been passed. She would rely upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Kathiroor Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2014) 14 SCC 352 to buttress her submission.

5. Mr. Amrito Das, learned Additional Advocate General, would submit that petitioner has rightly been terminated from the post of Chairperson, Child Welfare Committee in light of the report dated 12/11/2020 (Annexure R/1) submitted by the Collect