S. Chitra Vs The District Collector and The District Project Officer

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) 29 Sep 2010 Writ Petition (MD) No. 441 of 2010 and M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2010 (2010) 09 MAD CK 0265
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Writ Petition (MD) No. 441 of 2010 and M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2010

Hon'ble Bench

P. Jyothimani, J

Advocates

T. Lajapathi Roy, for the Appellant; V. Rajasekaran, Spl. Govt. Pleader, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Allowed

Judgement Text

Translate:

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

P. Jyothimani, J.@mdashThe writ petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Worker as it is seen in the order of the first Respondent/District Collector Dated 21.11.2009. By the impugned order dated 31.12.2009 passed by the second Respondent, the petitioner came to be terminated from the service on the ground of certain information that she is not living in the same village but living in the adjacent village.

2. Even though in the Appointment Order dated 21.11.2009, it is stated that if any complaint is received about the qualification of the petitioner, on proof, she can be terminated at any point of time, such termination is expected to be only after informing the petitioner about the complaint received and passing orders after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. In the present case, the impugned order shows that, in the enquiry, it is revealed that the petitioner is not living in the same village but in the adjacent village.

3. If really as per the qualification required for appointment of Anganwadi Worker, a person has to be resided either in the same village or within a certain distance of 10 Kms., and if there is violation in respect of the same, certainly, the petitioner is entitled to be heard by giving due opportunity to her. Such opportunity is admittedly not given as it is seen in the impugned order.

4. In such view of the matter, the impugned order is set aside only on the ground of not giving opportunity to the petitioner before passing the order of termination and the matter is remitted to the first Respondent/District Collector to pass appropriate orders after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. It is made clear that the first Respondent shall give proper opportunity to the petitioner and complete the enquiry in the manner known to law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. While admitting this Writ Petition, this Court has passed an interim order on 18.1.2010 granting interim stay if the impugned order had not been given effect to. The said order shall continue to be in operation till the final order is passed by the first Respondent/District Collector.

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More