HC sets aside administrative orders for removal of anganwadi sahayika

Raipur: Chhattisgarh High Court has set aside administrative orders that have revoked the appointment of an anganwadi sahayika, who is the petitioner in the case and held that the termination of services after two years without any opportunity of hearing constitutes a clear violation of the principles of natural justice and the rule of audi alteram partem.
Justice Goutam Bhaduri while hearing a petition, challenging the legality and validity of an order passed by Rajnandgaon district collector on February 25, 2014 and an order passed by the commissioner of Durg division on January 1, 2015, revoking the appointment of an Anganwadi Sahayika observed, "The term bias is used to denote a departure from the standing of even-handed justice. In the administrative action where the decision of authority may result in civil consequences, a hearing before taking decision is necessary."
"The collector's omnibus direction to carry out a scrutiny in a dispute between two other candidates appears to have influenced the CEO, janpad panchayat's actions. The apprehension of bias can be inferred from the surrounding circumstances," the court observed.
The inspection report does not indicate that the petitioner was given an opportunity to be heard during the scrutiny process.
The petitioner contends that pursuant to the advertisement on October 4, 2010 issued by the office of project officer, unified child and women development, Rajnandgaon, she applied for the post of Anganbadi Sahayika for Kumhalori village. Upon completion of the selection process, the petitioner was appointed as Anganbadi Sahayika for Ward No.2 on November 23, 2011. Similarly, another candidate was appointed for Ward No.1 of the same village. An unsuccessful candidate, challenged Ward No.1 candidate's appointment before the collector, alleging that marks were awarded contrary to the guidelines issued by the State on April 2, 2008.
The guidelines provide for filing an appeal under the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 and the Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Appeal & Revision) Rules, 1995, if the appointment is made by the CEO, janpad panchayat.
The petitioner submitted to the high court that she was removed from her position on June 24, 2013, without being heard, and another candidate was appointed in her place on the same date for Ward No.2. The petitioner challenged this appointment before the commissioner, seeking the annulment of the candidate's appointment and her own reinstatement.
The State counsel opposed the submission, stating that the collector's order merely directed the chief executive officer, janpad panchayat, Rajnandgaon to investigate the issues raised by various candidates and pass a fresh order, as the guidelines for awarding marks were not followed.
Consequently, the petitioner's appointment was deemed illegal, and she was removed. The State counsel further submitted that the CEO, janpad panchayat and the project officer found that the petitioner was given wrong preference and higher marks, leading to her removal and the appointment of another candidate. Upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the petitioner was appointed on Nov 23, 2011 for Ward No.2 and petitioner was not a party to the dispute between Ward No.1 candidate and the third party, the court observed, the court said.
The court ordered the chief executive officer, janpand panchayat, Rajnandgaon shall be at liberty to carry out the scrutiny again based on the documents which are prevailing for appointment of the petitioner and may pass the suitable orders after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.