JUDGMENT 1. - Instant petition has been filed against order dated 24/09/2011 passed by Addl. District Judge No.4, Kota whereby appeal preferred by defendant against temporary injunction was allowed and order dated 16/08/2007 of temporary injunction granted by learned trial Judge U/O.39 Rr.1 & 2, CPC, was set aside. 2. From the material on record, it appears that process of selection was initiated for the post of Aaganwadi Karyakarta in which plaintiff (petitioner) alongwith incumbent (Sugnabai) had had participated. It is relevant to record that in terms of Circular issued by respondent-State Government, Secondary was minimum qualification but on account of non-availability of incumbent with minimum qualification of Secondary, incumbent having lower qualification than minimum qualification can also be considered for selection but in the process of selection held on 18/02/2006, incumbent Sugana Bai was holding minimum qualification of secondary but still for the reasons best known to the department, petitioner holding qualification of middle class passed got selected on the post of Aaganwari Karya Karta and pursuant to her selection, she joined on 29/09/2006. But, she was apprehending that process has been initiated to cancel her appointment at this stage, she approached the trial Court by filing suit for permanent injunction alongwith application for temporary injunction. 3. However, after taking note of submissions, the learned trial Court allowed application seeking temporary injunction and respondents were restrained from terminating her services, against which the defendants-State authority preferred appeal, which was allowed by appellate Court vide judgment dated 24/09/2011 and temporary injunction granted vide order dated 16/08/2007 was set aside. 4. Main thrust of Counsel for petitioner is that apart from prima facie case, which the plaintiff was able to make out, balance of convenience & irreparable loss both being salient ingredients to be looked into while considering matter for grant of temporary injunction, were completely brushed aside by Court of appeal and when she was discharging duties of the post of Aaganwari Karyakarta, balance of convenience & irreparable loss were in her favour which have not been properly appreciated by Court of appeal while passing order impugned dated 24/09/2011. 5. 5. Counsel further submits that while the decision being taken to terminate services of plaintiff, there was a clear breach of principles of natural justice and from the material on record, action of respondents-authority was in clear violation of Article 14 of the Constitution; and no adverse decision could have been taken against the plaintiff after she being selected and having joined service and that apart, it is settled principle of administrative law that the person who is going to be adversely affected, is required to be heard before any prejudicial action being taken against him/her, that according to Counsel, has indisputably not been complied with by respondents while taking decision for dispensing with her services. 6. Submission made by Counsel is wholly bereft of merit for the reason that the reason having prevailed upon the authority in taking alleged decision against the plaintiff was based on salient facts having come on record and indisputably, minimum qualification prescribed was Secondary for an incumbent to hold the post of Aaganwari Karyakarta and in contingency of such applicant possessing minimum qualification of Secondary being not available, incumbent having lower qualification could be considered whereas in the instant matter, applicant having minimum qualification of Secondary (Sugana Bai) was available, the selection committee had to take into consideration such of the applicants and unless found unsuitable, applicants holding lower qualification than minimum qualification prescribed, could not have been considered and indisputably, the petitioner was holding lower qualification of 8th Standard, and at the same time, other incumbent (Sugna Bai) was holding minimum qualification of Secondary, that being so, affording of opportunity being heard in the facts of the instant case (supra) would be nothing but an empty formality. Since the facts having taken note of and indisputably admitted by petitioner in course of arguments, that being so, this Court can certainly record a finding that violation of principle of natural justice will remain only an empty formality in the totality of the facts on record (supra). 7. Since the facts having taken note of and indisputably admitted by petitioner in course of arguments, that being so, this Court can certainly record a finding that violation of principle of natural justice will remain only an empty formality in the totality of the facts on record (supra). 7. As regards submission made by Counsel that petitioner is working for last five years pendente her application before the trial Court by virtue of temporary injunction being granted vide order dated 16/08/2007, suffice it to say that if an incumbent has been allowed to continue in service under the garb of temporary injunction granted, no indefeasible right would confer upon such incumbent when indisputably other eligible incumbent holding minimum qualification of Secondary was available at the time when selection was being processed and there appears to be no justification in giving appointment to the petitioner. 8. It goes without saying that whenever public employment is given, it should always be inc conformity with the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. There may be prima facie case in favour of incumbent (plaintiff) but other two salient ingredients of balance of convenience & irreparable loss, certainly have to be kept in mind for grant of temporary injunction, having been looked into by court of appeal, while recording a finding in details, vide order impugned, this Court does not find any manifest error apparent on the face of record being committed by Court of appeal in passing order impugned warranting interference. 9. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.Petition dismissed. *******