Patna High Court
Manoj Kunwar @ Manoj DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that the D.P.O.’s order is appealable and the petitioner must pursue the statutory appeal, refusing to grant any interim relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Manoj Kunwar, a former Anganbadi Sahayika appointed in 2017, challenged her termination after 9.5 years of service, alleging that the termination memo dated 30‑08‑2025 and the order of the District Programme Officer (D.P.O.) in Remand Case No. 63/2019 were passed without giving her a hearing, violating natural justice. The State argued that the appointment was conditional pending pending litigation and that the D.P.O.’s order is appealable under the applicable margdarshika. The High Court, without adjudicating the merits, held that the D.P.O.’s order is indeed appealable and that the petitioner must file an appeal before the District Magistrate within 30 days, after which the appellate authority will decide the case on merit. The Court declined to grant any interim relief such as reinstatement or quashing of the termination order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed, with directions for the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal process.
Issues considered
- Whether the termination memo and the D.P.O.’s order were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.
- Whether the order of the District Programme Officer in Remand Case No. 63/2019 is an appealable order under the relevant appointment margdarshika.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim relief, including reinstatement, pending the appeal.
Subjects
- natural justice
- appointment
- conditional appointment
- Anganwadi Sahayika
- writ of certiorari
- appealability
- service termination
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16842 of 2025
======================================================
Manoj Kunwar @ Manoj Devi W/o late Pappu Pandey, R/o C/o Village
Lauriya, PO Lauriya, PS Govindganj, District East Champaran, Bihar 845411.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Secretary, Social Welfare Department.
2. The Director, I.C.D.S., Directorate, Social Welfare, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
4. The District Program Officer, East Champaran, Motihari.
5. The Child Development Project Officer, Areraj, East Champaran, Motihari.
6. The Female Supervisor, Child Development Project, Areraj, East
Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dharamnath Pd. Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel 04
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 11-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief/s:-
“I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of
certiorari or such other writ/s, order/s,
direction/s for quashing Memo No. 303 dated
30/08/2025, issued by Child Development
Project Officer, Arreraj, East Champaran
(Respondent No.-5), wherein the service of
petitioner was terminated as Anganbadi
Patna High Court CWJC No.16842 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026
2/4
Sahayika after almost 9.5 years in service,
without giving any opportunity of hearing.
And/or
II. For issuance of a writ in the nature of
certiorari or such other writ/s, order/s,
direction/s for quashing order dated
28/06/2025, passed in Remand Case No.-
63/2019, by District Programme Officer, East
Champaran, Motihari (Respondent No. 4),
insofar as the direction to the Child
Development Project Officer, Arreraj, East
Champaran (Respondent No.-5) for
terminating the service of person appointed
conditionally in the interregnum period on the
post of Anganbadi Sahayika is concerned,
And/or
III. For issuance of writ of mandamus for
reinstating the petitioner as Anganbadi
Sahayika at the same anganbadi centre or for
appointing the petitioner at any other
anganbadi centre, And/or
IV. For any other relief/s for which the
petitioner is entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the present case.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was appointed as Anganbadi Sahayika at Anganbadi
Centre No. 96, Panchayat, Radhiya, Arreraj, District- East
Patna High Court CWJC No.16842 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026
3/4
Champaran by virtue of Annexure-P/2 dated 03.02.2017 and has
been removed vide Memo No. 303 dated 30.08.2025
(Annexure-P/3), on the ground that an order has been passed by
the District Programme Officer, East Champaran, Motihari in
Remand Case no. 63/2019 dated 28.06.2025/30.06.2025.
Counsel submits that the appointment letter was unconditional
and removal has been made on the basis of a case in which, the
petitioner has not been heard. Therefore, counsel submits that
the said letter dated 30.08.2025 (Annexure-P/3) and order of the
D.P.O., (Annexure-P/4), both are completely in gross violation
of natural justice and therefore, fit to be set aside.
4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that from the prayer itself, it become crystal clear that
the order of the D.P.O passed in Remand Case no. 63/2019 has
been challenged and the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order
which is an appealable order according to the relevant
margdarshika for the appointment of Anganwadi Sevika &
Sahayika. Counsel submits that the relevant advertisement shall
definitely indicate that this appointment was conditional as prior
litigation was going on.
5. This Court without entering into the merit or
demerit of this case and considering only the legal aspect of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16842 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026
4/4
matter that the order of D.P.O has been challenged before this
Court which is an appealable order, therefore, not inclined to
grant any relief to the petitioner at this juncture, save and
except, grants liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order of
D.P.O by filing appeal raising all the points including the points
raised in the writ petition. The Appellate Authority shall, after
hearing all the concerned parties and examining the
advertisement pursuant to which the petitioner was appointed,
decide this case on merit.
6. The petitioner shall file her appeal before the
District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari (Respondent
no.3) within 30 days from today and the Respondent no.3 upon
receipt of the petitioner’s appeal shall pass order within 90 days
thereafter. The said 90 days shall be counted from the date of
completion of appearance of all the concerned.
7. Accordingly, with the aforesaid direction, this writ
petition stands disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.