1 2025:CGHC:777 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7286 of 2024 Smt. Shailja Julius W/o Shri A. P. Julius Aged About 48 Years R/o Gram- Barela, P.S.- Jarhagano, Tah. Mungeli, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 – Director, Health Services Department Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector, Mungeli, District Mungeli, C.G. 4 - Executive Director, State Health Resource Center Kali Badi Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 5-Chief Medical Health Officer, Mungeli, District Mungeli, CG 6 - Block Medical Officer P.H.C. Mungeli, District Mungeli, C.G. ... Respondents GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.01.08 18:13:40 +0530 2 For Petitioner : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Neelima Singh Thakur, PL. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 06/01/2025 1. Heard Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Neelima Singh Thakur, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. 2. Instant petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:- “(i)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 05/05/15 Annexure P/1. (ii)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits with back wages. (iii)Any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court.” 3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner was working as Block Coordinator at Block Mungeli in Mitanin Programme. She was working from 2006 her first appointment was as Mitanin then she was promoted to Mitanin trainer and thereafter as Block Coordinator in Block Mungeli on the fixed remuneration of 10,000 per month. Mitanin Programme at the state level the programme is conducted and owned by the Directorate of Health Services. Mitanin is selected by the community and this selection has to be approved by the Panchayat (Local Self Government body). The community selects the Mitanin in hamlet level meetings held for this purpose. The selection by the community has to be facilitated by a "prerak" (Motivator). After training of various stages of Mitanin Programme she has been promoted as Mitanin Trainer in the 3 year of 2009 and worked as Mitanin Trainer up to 2011 and then she has selected after examination of Block Co-coordinator on 2011 and worked up to 2015 since then she has discharged her duties with sincerity and without any stigma or complaint then all of sudden on 5/5/15 she has been fired from her post and got order of dismissal from the post of Coordinator by the Block Medical officer Mungeli. At the block level the programme is conducted by the Block Medical Officer or by a NGO. The block is the basic unit of programme administration on the basis of which grants are made, and progress is monitored. The three district training team members from each block (also known as the district resource persons- DRPs- play the role of block coordinators. The team of 15 to 20 trainers forms the block training team which manages the programme on a daily basis. At the village level the gram panchayat which endorsed Mitanin selection and the ANM (Auxiliary Nurse Midwife) and Anganwadi worker. She was discharging her duties with efficiency, honesty and without stigma or complaint therefore the respondent no.5 has issued a certificate on 07/06/2012. The respondents had convened a training programme for Block Coordinator. The petitioner has got training from 09/10/2012 to 14/10/2012 and received the certificate from Sr. Programme Officers. On 25/03/15 few Mitanin has filed a complaint that some irregularities has been done by the present petitioner, Smt. Uttara Patre and Smt. Kunti Yadav. It is also stated in complaint that the present petitioner and other 2 have taken certain amount as bribes from the complainant and they have not selected them. It is alleged that the present petitioner has taken Rs/8000, Uttara Patre has taken Rs/-16000 and Kunti Yadav has taken Rs/- 6000 from the complainants. After the 4 enquiry, (which is not in the knowledge of the petitioner) enquiry report has been submitted by the Programme Coordinator to the Respondent no. 4 on 30/04/15. Against the illegal order passed by the respondent no.6 the petitioner has moved an application for reconsideration of the order because she has not given any opportunity of hearing but till now that has not been decided. During this period Smt. Uttra Patre has filed the writ petition no. WPS. 1573/2020 and on 14/08/24 this Hon'ble court has passed an order in favor of the petitioner and the joint dismissal order has been set aside. State of Chhattisgarh has issued guidelines for coordination and running of the Mitanin Programme and changes of the Block Coordinator. As per the guidelines to change or remove of the Block Coordinator it is mentioned that -if B.M.O., Distt. Nodal Officer or Distt. Coordinator found the work unsatisfactory then after examination of work they will give one month time to correct his/ her work satisfactory and after expiry of one month time they will again examine the work done by the Block Coordinator and if they found again unsatisfactory then they will recommend to selection committee for removing Block coordinator with detail reason. And then three members would agree for decision then the employee may be removed Or terminated/ dismissed. But that guideline has not been followed. After the order passed by this Honble Court the petitioner has filed an application for reconsidering her case in light of W.P.S. No. 1573/2020 whereby the other employee has been granted relief and joint order has been set aside. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identical petition has been decided by the coordinate bench of this Court in WPS No.1573 of 2020 vide order dated 14/08/2024 and the matter is squarely 5 covered by the said order, as such the petition may be disposed of in terms of order passed in WPS No.1573 of 2020, to which the learned State counsel has no objection. 5. From perusal of the impugned order itself, it is apparent that three of the Mitanins have been removed from service on the same ground by the same order which has been challenged in WPS No.1573 of 2020. 6. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner which is not opposed by the learned State counsel, this petition is also allowed in terms of order passed in WPS No.1573 of 2020 vide order dated 14/08/2024. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge gouri