Point of Law: Post of Anganbadi Worker is not a post in Government service, but such appointment is made subject to payment of honorarium.

JUDGMENT :

[Arup Kumar Goswami, J.]

1. Heard Sushil Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 & 6 and Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.5.

2. This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 20.02.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No.867 of 2004, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition preferred by the appellant.

3. The petitioner was appointed as an Anganbadi Worker by an order dated 31.03.1998 by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Khadgawan i.e. respondent No.5. By an order dated 20.02.2004, she was terminated from the post of Anganbadi Worker and this order was put to challenge in the writ petition.

4. In the writ petition, primarily, two contentions were advanced : that the order was passed without issuing any show-cause notice and thereby it militated against the principles of natural justice and secondly, there was no allegation by the Gram Sabha and there was no recommendation from the Women and Child Development Committee for the action proposed.

5. The learned Single Judge, with regard to the contentions advanced recorded as follows :

“5. Subsequently, the petitioner has been again issued with a show cause notice. The record shows that the first show cause notice was issued on 08.08.1999 and the subsequent show cause notice was issued on 17.11.2000. Along with the reply, the respondents have also submitted the inspection report in respect of the periodical inspection that was conducted at the Anganbadi Centre, Bairdand, where the petitioner was appointed as an Anganbadi worker. In the inspection report also, there has been large number of irregularities detected and moreover there is mass complaint made against the petitioner by the villagers in general holding that the petitioner was unauthorizedly absent on regular basis and most of the time, the Anganbadi Centre is found closed.

6. The respondents have also enclosed along with the reply, the inspection sheet as well as the statement recorded of the villagers during the course of inspection. Subsequently, the petitioner was again issued with a second show cause notice on 28.01.2004 to which also the petitioner did not submit any sought of reply.

7. xxx xxx xxx

8. Perusal of the record would show that subsequent to the second show cause notice issued on 28.01.2004, there was no response from the petitioner, the matter was placed before the Women and Child Development Committee, Janpad Panchayat, Khadgawan on 04.02.2004. The said Committee on due consideration of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly taking note of the allegations and the evidence, which were collected during the course of investigation, the Women and Child Development Committee, Janpad Panchayat, Khadgawan finally in its meeting dated 04.02.2004 passed a resolution for terminating the services of the petitioner and further ordered that appropriate orders in this regard be passed and based upon which the Project Officer has passed the impugned order Annexure P/1 on 20.02.2004.”

6. In the reply affidavit, it was categorically stated by respondent Nos.1 to 4 and 6 that a meeting of the Women and Child Development Committee of Janpad Panchayat, Khadagawan was held on 04.02.2004 wherein it was resolved vide Resolution No.2 to remove the petitioner from the post and thereafter, in the General Body meeting of the Janpad Panchayat, Khadagawan held on 13.02.2004, vide Resolution No.5(2), the resolution passed by the Women and Child Development Committee, Janpad Panchayat, Khadagawan in its meeting dated 04.02.2002 was confirmed.

7. In arriving at the conclusion, the learned Single Judge also took note of the fact that though elaborate reply-affidavit was filed by the State-respondents in July, 2004, in the interregnum period of 15 years, no rejoinder-affidavit, rebutting the contentions raised in the writ pe