SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ori) 275

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
Anita Behera – Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha & Others - Opposite Parties
WP(C) No.33825 of 2023
Decided On : 13-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. B. Das, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. S. Nayak, Addl. Standing Counsel.

Orders made without giving an individual a proper hearing violate natural justice and are deemed nullities, warranting quashing.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Disengagement of Anganwadi worker - Order quashed due to violation of principles of natural justice - No opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner before the impugned order dated 12.09.2023 was made. (Paras 1, 4, 6)

(B) Natural justice - The principles of natural justice require that no order should be passed adversely affecting a person without affording them a proper hearing. Violation renders the order a nullity. Reaffirmed by references to various judgments outlining that such violations necessitate quashing the impugned order. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the disengagement order by the Sub-Collector on allegations of forgery in her selection process for the Anganwadi worker position, asserting she was not given an opportunity for a hearing.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the order was made in violation of natural justice and was thus null and void; accordingly, it quashed the Sub-Collector's order and directed the matter be reconsidered lawfully.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the petitioner was afforded a proper opportunity to be heard regarding the allegations leading to her disengagement.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that failure to provide a fair hearing rendered the disengagement order nonviable, emphasizing the critical nature of adhering to natural justice principles in administrative actions.

Result: Writ petition allowed and the impugned order quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for quashing order. (Para 1)
2. lack of opportunity for hearing. (Para 2 , 3)
3. violation of natural justice principles. (Para 4 , 5)
4. established legal precedents on natural justice. (Para 6 , 7)
5. decision to quash and remit the case. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the impugned Order dated 12.09.2023 (Annexure-5) passed by the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) disengaging the petitioner from Anganwadi worker of Bhairabgada Anganwadi Centre, as per the allegation of the villagers on the ground of submission of forgery certificates by her (petitioner) during her selection as Anganwadi worker of Bhairabgada Anganwadi Centre.

2. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

During hearing, the learned counsels of both the sides fairly submitted that, for passing the impugned order by the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) relating to the disengagement of the petitioner from Anganwadi worker of Bhairabgada Anganwadi Centre, no opportunity of hearing was given to her (petitioner).

3. It appears from the impugned order vide Annexure-5 that, in fact, no notice was issued to the petitioner as well as no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner to have her say before the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) relating to the allegations alleged by the villagers of Bhairabgada against her for her disengagement.

4. The aforesaid submissions of the learned counsels of both the sides as well as the impugned order vide Annexure-5 are going to show that, the impugned order vide Annexure-5 has been passed by the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) for the disengagement of the petitioner as Anganwadi worker of Bhiarabgada centre in violation of the principles of natural justice.

5. It is the settled propositions of law that,

“if any order or judgment is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be quashed. Because, violation of principles of natural justice renders the impugned order as nullity. Whenever an order is struck down as invalid being in violation of principles of natural justice, there is no final decision of the case and fresh proceedings are left open.”

6. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:-

(i) In a case betweenA.R. Antulay vs R.S. Nayak & Anr. reported in 1988 (2) SCC 602 in Para No.55 (Seven Judges Bench) that, Violation of principles of natural justice renders the act a nullity.

(ii) In a case between Dattu Namdev Thakur Vs State Of Maharashtra and others reported in 2012 SCW 203 that, when, the impugned order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be quashed.

(iii) In a case betweenAsit Kumar Kar vs State Of West Bengal & Ors reported in (2009) 2 AWC 1628 that, an order having adverse consequences should not be passed without hearing the person affected thereby.

(iv) In a case between Durgawati Singh And Ors. vs Deputy Registrar, Firms Societies & Chits Lucknow and others decided in Special Appeal No.497 of 2021 (Allahabad) that, whenever an order is struck down as invalid being in violation of principles of natural justice, there is no final decision of the case and fresh proceedings are left open.

7. As per the discussions and observations made above, when, it is held that, the impugned order dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure-5) has been passed by the Sub- Collector, Gunpur (O.P. No.2) in violation of the principles of natural justice, then at this juncture, by applying the ratio of the above decisions to the impugned order, it is felt proper to quash the said impugned order vide Annexure-5 by interfering with the same through this writ petition filed by the petitioner.

8. Therefore, there is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top