The Patna High Court, in a significant ruling, has held that terminating an Anganwadi worker solely based on implication in a criminal case, without providing an opportunity to be heard, violates the principles of natural justice. The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Justice Alok Kumar Pandey in Letters Patent Appeal No. 828 of 2019 arising from Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12752 of 2014.
The case involved Shubhadra Kumari @ Subhadra Devi, an Anganwadi Sevika from Nalanda district, who was terminated from her position in 2014 due to her alleged involvement in a criminal case and continuous absence from duty. The appellant, represented by advocate Anil Kumar Singh, challenged the termination order before the High Court.
Background of the Case:
Shubhadra Kumari was selected as an Anganwadi Sevika at Anganwadi Center No. 62 at Atwal Bigha, Nalanda district, in 2003. In 2013, she was implicated in a criminal case (Tharthari P.S. Case No. 60 of 2013) for offenses under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Subsequently, on February 26, 2014, the District Programme Officer (DPO) Nalanda cancelled her selection, citing her continuous absence from the place of posting. This order was later affirmed by the Deputy Director (Welfare), Patna Division, on May 3, 2014.
Legal Issues and Court’s Decision:
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the termination of the appellant’s service without following due process and providing an opportunity to be heard was justified.
The court, setting aside the single judge’s order dismissing the writ petition, ruled in favour of the appellant. It observed that the termination was carried out abruptly, without serving any show cause notice or providing an opportunity for the appellant to present her case.
Justice Alok Kumar Pandey, delivering the judgment, emphasized the importance of natural justice principles in both quasi-judicial and administrative functions. The court cited several Supreme Court judgments, including D.K. Yadav vs. J.M.A. Industries Ltd. (1993) and State Bank of India and Others vs. Rajesh Agarwal and Others (2023), to underscore this point.
The court observed:
“The Principles of natural justice are not mere legal formalities. They constitute substantive obligations that need to be followed by decision-making and adjudicating authorities. The principles of natural justice act as a guarantee against arbitrary action, both in terms of procedure and substance, by judicial, quasi-judicial, and administrative authorities”.
Importantly, the court noted that the appellant was acquitted in the criminal case on April 28, 2018. It also pointed out that the guidelines for selection of Anganwadi workers do not apply to those already appointed, as in the appellant’s case who had been serving since 2003.
Also Read
Court’s Decision:
1. Set aside the single judge’s order and allowed the writ petition.
2. Awarded compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 to the appellant, to be paid within three months.
3. Directed that failure to pay within the stipulated time would attract 6% per annum interest from the date of filing the writ petition.
