2026:JHHC:9893 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 5691 of 2022 …… Manita Devi, aged about 35 years, wife of Rohit Layak, resident of village Jalwe, P.O. Tharihat, P.S. Ramgarh, District-Dumka, Jharkhand. …. Petitioner(s) -VERSUS- 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District-Dumka, Jharkhand. 3. The District Social Welfare Officer, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District-Dumka, Jharkhand. 4. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Dumka, P.O. and P.S. Dumka, District-Dumka, Jharkhand. 5. The Child Development Project Officer, Ramgarh, P.O. and P.S. Ramgarh, District-Ramgarh, Jharkhand. …..Respondent (s) …… CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.C. Mishra, Adv For the Resp.-State : Mr. Anish Kr. Mishra, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-I …… 12/07.04.2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In the instant writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of letter no.1337 dated 10.10.2022 and memo no. 293 dated 13.10.2022 (Annexure-7 of this writ application) issued by the 3rd Respondent; whereby the petitioner has been terminated from the post of Sahayika in Aanganbari Centre, Jalwe and order of termination has been approved by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Dumka and also directed the Child Development Officer, Ramgarh to conduct a fresh Aam Sabha and select new Sahayika in Aanganbari Centre, Jalwe and the aforesaid 2026:JHHC:9893 2 order has been given to the petitioner vide memo no. 293 dated 13.10.2022, which is acknowledged to the petitioner on 06.11.2022. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of this court towards Annexure-7, which is the order of termination, and submits that the same has been issued by a person who is not competent to pass such an order. He further refers to Clause-16 of the guidelines dated 02.06.2006, contained in Letter No. 585 (Annexure- B/1) issued by Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Women and Child Development, Government of Jharkhand; wherein it has been categorically stated that only the Child Development Project Officer, Ramgarh can issue an order of termination on the recommendation of DDC. Accordingly, it is submitted that the impugned order stands vitiated on the ground of issuance by incompetent authority. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent, though opposes the prayer to quash the impugned order and tries to impress this Court on merits of this case; however, he could not controvert the fact that District Social Welfare Officer is not competent to issue an order of termination which lies with the Child Development Project Officer on the recommendation of DDC, which is absent in the case. 2026:JHHC:9893 3 5. Having regard to the above, the impugned order dated 10.02.2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. However, liberty is there to the respondents to pursue the matter afresh in accordance with law and the regulation as indicated hereinabove. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands allowed. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J) 07.04.2026 Amardeep/ Uploaded on 10.04.2026