IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE th ON THE 25 OF APRIL, 2024 WRIT PETITION No. 7957 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

SMT SANDHYA BAI MEHER W/O SHRI RAJU MEHER, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AANGANWADI SAHAYIKA R/O VILLAGE RENGNA TEHSIL LATERI DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI H.K. SHUKLA - ADVOCATE )

AND

1. KAMLESH BAI MAINA W/O KAMAL MAINA R/O VILLAGE RENGNA TEHSIL LATERI DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. PROJECT OFFICER ISOLATED WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE PROJECT, LATERI, DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. STATE OF MP THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI SAMEER KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND SHRI NEELESH TOMAR -GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

Signature Not Verified ORDER The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal in Case No. 1017/Appeal/2019-20, whereby while allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent no.1 learned Additional Commissioner had set aside the order of termination of services of respondent no.1 as a Aanganwadi Worker of Aanganwadi Centre Rengna, Lateri, District Vidisha, which resulted into automatically termination of services of the petitioner who was appointed on the aforesaid post as and when the post fall vacant after termination of the services of the respondent no.1.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the said order submitted that the order impugned is perse illegal as the fact of the petitioner being appointed on the post of Aanganwadi Worker of the said Aanganwadi Centre was not brought to its knowledge either by the State or by the respondent no.1 who was the appellant therein when admittedly the petitioner in pursuance to the advertisement issued for appointment on the post of Aanganwadi Worker in Aanganwadi Centre Rengna, Tehsil Lateri, District Vidisha had applied for the said post along with other applicants and on 28.12.2019 an interim list was published and after calling the objections in the meeting held on 10.2.2020 by the selection committee she was appointed on the said post.

3. It was also contended that respondent no.1 whose services as Aanganwadi Worker were terminated vide order dated 24.4.2019 and later- on was affirmed in the first appeal vide order dated 19.6.2019 by the Additional Collector was having no lien on the aforesaid post and even Signature Not Verified though later-on in second appeal before the Additional Commissioner she was successful but when a substantial right has been created in favour of the present petitioner without giving an opportunity of hearing to hear the said order could not have been passed. Therefore, the order passed by the Additional Commissioner is perse illegal. Thus, it was prayed that present petition be allowed.

4. Learned counsel had also placed reliance on the interim order passed by this Court on 30.10.2023, whereby a detailed order has been passed by this Court while granting interim relief and it has been argued that since this Court was convinced about the illegality committed towards the present petitioner in so many words this Court had stayed the effect and operation of the impugned order which itself goes to show that the impugned order was bad in law. To bolster his submission he has placed reliance in the matter of Anita Behera Vs. Collector, Puri and others passed in W.P.(C) No.8716 of 2020 by High Court of Cuttack and was contended that when the petitioner has been selected by following the fresh advertisement and the respondent no.1 had not participated in the said process of selection pursuant to such advertisement the petitioner who got engaged and his joining in service could not be saddled with the disengagement. Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted