JUDGMENT Narendra Nath Tiwari, J. 1. The Petitioner has prayed for quashing Letter No. 213 dated 31st December, 2010 issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Kolebira (Annexure3), whereby the Petitioner, who was working as Anganbari Sevika in Sardha Toli Centre, has been removed with immediate effect. 2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner was selected as Anganbari Sevika on 2nd September, 2010 by the Aam Sabha and her appointment was duly approved by the competent authority and since thereafter she had been continuously working as Anganbari Sevika in Sradha Toli Centre. But suddenly by Letter No. 213 dated 31st December, 2010 issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Kolebira, the Petitioner has been removed even without assigning any reason. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that before issuing the said letter of termination, neither any notice was issued to the Petitioner nor she was given any opportunity of hearing/representation. The said letter also does not show any reason for her termination. Thus, the said letter is wholly arbitrary, whimsical and violative of principle of natural justice. 3. Learned J.C. to G.P.I, appearing on behalf of the Respondents, submitted that the Petitioner has been removed on the basis of Letter No. 447(ii) dated 28th August, 2010 issued by the District Social Welfare Officer, Simdega, which has not been brought on record by the Petitioner. The said letter must have contained the reason for her termination. The Petitioner's removal is, thus, not arbitrary or illegal. 4. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered the facts and materials on record. On perusal of the impugned letter dated 31st December, 2010 (Annexure3), I find that no reason has been assigned for removal of the Petitioner. The order has been issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Kolebira, Simdega, which simply says that she is being removed on the basis of Letter No. 447(ii) dated 28th August, 2010 of District Social Welfare Officer, Simdega. 5. It is well established that the letter/order affecting the right of a person must speak/show observance of the principle of natural justice. Any document or affidavit cannot be looked into supplementary to the said letter/order for determining the complain of nonobservance of rule of natural justice. 6. 5. It is well established that the letter/order affecting the right of a person must speak/show observance of the principle of natural justice. Any document or affidavit cannot be looked into supplementary to the said letter/order for determining the complain of nonobservance of rule of natural justice. 6. In view of the above, I find that the impugned letter dated 31st December, 2010 is wholly non-speaking and laconic and does not conform to the requirement of principle of natural justice. The same, being violative of the said Rule as also of Article 14 of the Constitution, is unsustainable. 7. In view of the above, the impugned letter of removal of the Petitioner dated 31st December, 2010 issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Kolebira (Annexure3) is quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Petition allowed.