[2025:RJ-JP:19511] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5232/2010 Smt. Santosh Verma W/o Neta Ram, aged about 33 years, R/o Dhani Panditawali, Gram Post Kotadi Dhayalan, Vaya Rengus, Tehsil Srimadhopur, Distt. Sikar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan through, its Chief Adminstrative Secretary, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. The Director, Women & Child Development Department, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. The Deputy Director, (Child Development) Integrated Child Development Services, Sikar. 4. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Sikar. 5. Child Development Scheme Officer, Women & Child Development Department, Srimadhopur. 6. The Gram Panchayat, Kotri Dhaylan, through its Sarpanch, Panchayat Samiti Shri Madhopur, Dist. Sikar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naveen Dhuwan, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Akash Gaur, Dy. GC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 08/05/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may most graciously be pleased to accept and allow the writ petition and further be pleased: (i) quashed and set aside the order dated 23.2.2010. (ii) By an appropriate writ order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to reinstate the petitioner as a Sahayika at Angan Bari Center, Rajputaon Ki Dhani or other center; (iii) any other order which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner; [2025:RJ-JP:19511] (2 of 3) [CW-5232/2010] (v) cost of the writ petition may also be awarded in favour of the petitioners." 2. On 19.04.2010, while hearing the matter on admission at this stage, this Court passed the following order:- "The contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner was the working as Anganbari Sahaika since 1.9.2000 when he she was initially appointed on the said post. She was earlier working at Anganbari Centre Kotari Dhayalayan. However due to political reasons, in the year 2009, she was transferred to Aanganbari Centre Rajputo Ki Dhani without there being any complaint about her working. However, suddenly vide order dated 23.2.2010 (Annexure-11), her services were terminated without giving her an opportunity of being heard and the said Anganbari Centre was directed to be closed. If at all, the centre was required to be closed, the petitioner could be accommodated at any other adjoining centre. There was no reason, however, to close the said Anganbari Centre. Issue notice to the respondents. Rule is made returnable by six weeks. Till the returnable date, operation and effect of order dated 23.2.2010 (Annexure-11) shall remain stayed. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to accommodate the petitioner at any other centre." 3. Today, both the learned counsel for the parties have informed that pursuant to aforesaid interim order, the petitioner is still continuing in service. They have also submitted that in the similar circumstances in the case of as Anganbari Worker in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5951/2010, this Court has passed following order:- "2. Instant civil writ petition was filed by petitioner way back on 23.04.2010, impugning the order dated 23.02.2010, whereby and whereunder her service as Anganbari Worker at Anganbadi Center, Rajputaon Ki Dhani was terminated with immediate effect. 3. From the record, it appears that at the time of issuance of notice, this Court vide order 29.04.2010, stayed the operation and effect of termination order dated 23.02.2010 and respondents were granted liberty to accommodate petitioner at any other Centre. 4. Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents having instructions from the respondents submitted that petitioner has been allowed to work as Aanganbadi Worker and presently he is working. 5. Thus, in the light of statement made by counsel [2025:RJ-JP:19511] (3 of 3) [CW-5232/2010] for respondents that the petitioner has been allowed to continue to work as Anganbadi Worker, instant writ petition stands disposed of." 4. Both the counsels have prayed for deciding the instant writ petition in view of the above order dated 19.12.2024. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, in the light of observations made in aforesaid order dated 19.12.2024 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5951/2010. 5. However, it is made clear that this would not preclude the respondents from taking action in accordance with law, if the contingency so arises. 6. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 7. Pending application/s, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /118