Sumitra Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23567 of 2012 ====================================================== Sumitra Kumari Wife Of Mahesh Sharma Resident Of Village- Sirsa, P.O.- Dighwa Dubauli, P.S. Baikunthpur, District- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar and Ors Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 2.
State Health Society, Bihar, Patna Through Its Executive Director, Family Welfare Building, Sheikhpura, Patna- 800014 3.
District Health Society, Gopalganj Through Secretary-Cum-Civil Surgeon, Ghoshmore, Dargah Road, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj 4.
The Medical Officer Incharge, Primary Health Centre, Baikunthpur, DistrictGopalganj ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nawnit Kumar Tiwary, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG 4 For the Respondent No. 2 :
Mr. K.K. Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Shashi Shekhar, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 02-01-2023
1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that before passing of the order impugned dated 27.09.2012, no opportunity was given to the petitioner. It is stated that during the pendency of this writ petition charge-sheet has already been filed in the F.I.R. registered by the Respondents and the evidence has not yet commenced in trial.
2. Learned counsel submits that prior notice/ opportunity of hearing was required to be given to the petitioner before terminating her services. I have considered the submission. The petitioner was appointed on contract basis and
Patna High Court CWJC No.23567 of 2012(2) dt.02-01-2023 2/2 if there is a doubt regarding the appointment having been obtained by fraudulent means, no notice or opportunity of hearing is required to be given at this stage. Moreover, chargesheet has been filed with regard to the F.I.R. lodged by the Respondents. Keeping in view thereto, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.
3. The writ petition is mis-concieved and is accordingly dismissed.
(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Sachin/- Item No. 24 U