IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.N.PATHAK, J.
Mariam Horo – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W.P.(S) No.5230 of 2022
Decided on : 21-12-2022
Dismissal - Service - Aaganbari Sevika - Memo No.205 dated 15.09.2022 - [Guidelines of Aaganbari Sewika] - The court quashed the dismissal order and directed reinstatement of the petitioner, emphasizing the need for proper consideration of the petitioner's 35 years of service, sympathy for her circumstances, and the lack of inquiry into her illness. The court also held that the impugned order was cryptic and non-speaking, justifying the exercise of its jurisdiction despite the availability of an alternative remedy.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Aaganbari Sevika, was dismissed from her services after 35 years of continuous service due to illness and absence from duties. The petitioner sought quashing of the dismissal order and reinstatement, citing her regular applications for leave and medical certificates.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dismissal order was passed without proper consideration of the petitioner's service, illness, and absence, and in violation of principles of natural justice. The court also held that the impugned order was cryptic and non-speaking, justifying the exercise of its jurisdiction despite the availability of an alternative remedy.
Issues: The issues involved the dismissal of the petitioner, the consideration of her 35 years of service, the validity of her leave applications and medical certificates, and the availability of an alternative remedy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for proper consideration of the petitioner's service, sympathy for her circumstances, and the lack of inquiry into her illness. The court also held that the impugned order was cryptic and non-speaking, justifying the exercise of its jurisdiction despite the availability of an alternative remedy.
Final Decision: The court quashed the dismissal order and directed reinstatement of the petitioner, with all consequential benefits, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
JUDGMENT :
The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing of order as contained in Memo No.205 dated 15.09.2022 (Annexure-9) issued by Child Development Project Officer, Karra, Khunti, whereby and whereunder, the petitioner has been dismissed from her services with immediate effect without assigning any reasons after 35 longs years of her continuous service. Further, prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner.
2. As per the factual matrix, the case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as Aaganbari Sevika vide Memo No.20 dated 02.05.1987 duly issued by the Deputy Director (Welfare), South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi for the Centre at Chapi, Karra, Khunti and she joined her duties w.e.f. 15.05.1987. After her appointment, she worked with full satisfaction of the respondents at the said Centre, which was situated in a rural area with no facilities like road. On 25.12.2021, the petitioner husband of the petitioner died and as such, the petitioner made an application on 01.01.2022 before the Supervisor, Department of Women & Child Development, Karra, Khunti for information and also requested for grant of leave for the rituals of her husband. Thereafter, the petitioner joined her duties, but she became medically unfit due to malaria and she again made an application on 22.03.2022 for grant of one week leave, which was granted to her. However, as the petitioner remained medically unfit, she made another application on 01.04.2022, requesting for few more days of leave. Accordingly, she joined her duties, but again she became ill and made an application on 27.04.2022 before the respondent No.5, informing her illness. On 28.05.2022, she made an application before the respondents that she is now medically fit and willing to join her duties and on 30.05.2022, she joined the duty, but vide letter No.118 dated 10.06.2022 issued by Child Development Project Officer, Karra, Khunti, a show cause notice was issued against the petitioner regarding her absence in the month of April, 2022, wherein, respondent No.3 had visited the said Centre, but the petitioner was absent. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner replied on 11.06.2022, informing the respondents that in April, she was medically unfit and she had already submitted applications regularly before the respondent No.5. However, being not satisfied with her reply, the Child Development Project Officer, Karra, Khunti dismissed the petitioner from services vide Memo No.205 dated 15.09.2022 with immediate effect, which is under challenge.
3. Mr. Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner assails the impugned order on the ground that the petitioner had worked continuously for 35 years long service under the respondents, it is only because of illness, she remained absent from the duties, but she had made applications regularly before the respondents, annexing the medical certificates also. He further submits that medical certificates, submitted by the petitioner were not considered by the respondents, while passing the impugned order. The petitioner was dismissed on the ground that on the visit of higher officials, she was found absent from duties, however, she had already made applications for leave the period in question. The impugned order is passed in complete violation of principles of natural justice and dehors the Rules. The respondents ought to have been considered the 35 years of unblemished service career of the petitioner and without considering the same, the order of dismissal has been issued.
4. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents. Mr. Ashwini Bhusan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently opposes the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner never submitted applications before the respondents, neither any medical certificates have been brought on record to show that she was ill du
Whirphool Corporation V. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors.
Proper consideration of service, illness, and absence, violation of principles of natural justice, and the exercise of jurisdiction despite the availability of an alternative remedy.
The impugned orders were quashed due to being cryptic, capacious, and non-speaking, not providing reasons for dismissal/termination, and being issued by an unauthorized authority. The court emphasize....
Violation of principles of natural justice and the need for the new incumbent to make way for the reinstated employee.
Honorary or voluntary service positions do not constitute a civil post, and therefore, they are not entitled to constitutional procedural safeguards during termination. Consequently, no formal discip....
The court emphasized the importance of following due procedure and providing an opportunity for post-decisional hearing, and held that the petitioner's failure to justify her unauthorized absence jus....
The engagement of Anganwari Sevika is not a post in the Government service and does not have protection under Article 311 of the Constitution. The requirement of principle of natural justice must be ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.