WP(C) No.33825 of 2023 ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK WP(C) No.33825 of 2023 An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. *** Anita Behera … Petitioner. -VERSUS- State of Odisha & Others … Opposite Parties. Counsel appeared for the parties: For the Petitioner : Mr. B. Das, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Mr. S. Nayak, Addl. Standing Counsel. (For the State) P R E S E N T: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA Date of Hearing : 13.03.2026 :: Date of Judgment : 13.03.2026 WP(C) No.33825 of 2023 JUDGMENT ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.— 1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the impugned Order dated 12.09.2023 (Annexure-5) passed by the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) disengaging the petitioner from Anganwadi worker of Bhairabgada Anganwadi Centre, as per the allegation of the villagers on the ground of submission of forgery certificates by her (petitioner) during her selection as Anganwadi worker of Bhairabgada Anganwadi Centre. 2. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State. During hearing, the learned counsels of both the sides fairly submitted that, for passing the impugned order by the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) relating to the disengagement of the petitioner from Anganwadi worker of Bhairabgada Anganwadi Centre, no opportunity of hearing was given to her (petitioner). WP(C) No.33825 of 2023 3. It appears from the impugned order vide Annexure-5 that, in fact, no notice was issued to the petitioner as well as no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner to have her say before the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) relating to the allegations alleged by the villagers of Bhairabgada against her for her disengagement. 4. The aforesaid submissions of the learned counsels of both the sides as well as the impugned order vide Annexure-5 are going to show that, the impugned order vide Annexure-5 has been passed by the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (Opp. Party No.2) for the disengagement of the petitioner as Anganwadi worker of Bhiarabgada centre in violation of the principles of natural justice. 5. It is the settled propositions of law that, “if any order or judgment is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be quashed. Because, violation of principles of natural justice renders the impugned order as nullity. Whenever an order is struck down as invalid being in violation of principles of natural justice, there is no final decision of the case and fresh proceedings are left open.” WP(C) No.33825 of 2023 6. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:- (i) In a case between A.R. Antulay vs R.S. Nayak & Anr. reported in 1988 (2) SCC 602 in Para No.55 (Seven Judges Bench) that, Violation of principles of natural justice renders the act a nullity. (ii) In a case between Dattu Namdev Thakur Vs State Of Maharashtra and others reported in 2012 SCW 203 that, when, the impugned order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, the same is liable to be quashed. (iii) In a case between Asit Kumar Kar vs State Of West Bengal & Ors reported in (2009) 2 AWC 1628 that, an order having adverse consequences should not be passed without hearing the person affected thereby. (iv) In a case between Durgawati Singh And Ors. vs Deputy Registrar, Firms Societies & Chits Lucknow and others decided in Special Appeal No.497 of 2021 (Allahabad) that, whenever an order is struck down as invalid being in violation of principles of natural justice, there is no final decision of the case and fresh proceedings are left open. 7. As per the discussions and observations made above, when, it is held that, the impugned order dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure-5) has been passed by the Sub- Collector, Gunpur (O.P. No.2) in violation of the principles of natural justice, then at this juncture, by applying the WP(C) No.33825 of 2023 ratio of the above decisions to the impugned order, it is felt proper to quash the said impugned order vide Annexure-5 by interfering with the same through this writ petition filed by the petitioner. 8. Therefore, there is merit in this writ petition filed by the Petitioner. The same is to be allowed. 9. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. 10. The impugned order dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure-5) passed by the Sub-Collector, Gunupur (O.P. No.2) is quashed. The matter relating to the disengagement of the petitioner on the ground of submission of forgery certificate is remitted back to the Sub-Collector, Gunpur (O.P. No.2) to decide the same afresh as per law after giving opportunity of being heard to the Parties thereof including the Petitioner in this writ petition in full compliance of the principles of natural justice as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months WP(C) No.33825 of 2023 from the date of filing of the certified copy of this judgment by any of the Parties. 11. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of finally. (ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA) JUDGE High Court of Orissa, Cuttack The 13 .03. 2026// Sipra Muduli Sr. Stenographer Cuttack