JUDGMENT : Soumitra Pal, J. Since issues are identical, the matters are taken up for hearing analogously. However, for the sake of adjudication the facts in the writ petition, being W.P. 14290 (W) of 2012 (Shampa Dey v. State of West Bengal and others) are referred to for proper appreciation. 2. In this writ petition the petitioner, an Anganwadi Worker, has challenged the order of termination dated 31st January. 2008 issued by the Child Development Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Scheme Project, Pandua, Hooghly, the respondent No. 5 terminating her service on the ground that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Mr. Nandi, learned Advocate for the petitioner has relied on unreported orders passed in W.P. 12204 (W) of 2011 (Manashi Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and others) and in W.P. 19895 (W) of 2012 (Chaitali Das v. State of West Bengal and others) in support of his submission. 3. Mr. Majumdarand Haider, learned Advocates for the respondents submit that as the memorandum dated 25th January, 2006 stipulates that the candidates who are graduates will not be eligible for the post of Anwangadi Worker and if a graduate candidate suppresses her academic qualification, if selected would be terminated without assigning any reason and as the advertisement dated 5th July, 2006 had stipulated that graduates were barred from making application and as the petitioners had suppressed their qualifications, in view of the specific condition in the advertisement, the orders of termination passed are just and proper. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in Union of India and others v. Sukhen Chandra Das, (2008) 17 SCC 125 and in Manoj Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi and others ; (2010) 11 SCC 702 in support of their submission. 4. Learned Advocates for the respective parties have also relied on the judgment passed by the Special Bench in Rina Dutta and others v. Anjali Mahato and others, 2010 (2) CLJ (Cal) 321. 5. Admittedly the petitioner had applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker and was selected. After it was detected that she had suppressed her qualification and had submitted a false declaration in her application which was in violation of the condition of appointment in the service, her engagement was terminated with effect from 1st February, 2008. The question is whether such termination is just and proper. After it was detected that she had suppressed her qualification and had submitted a false declaration in her application which was in violation of the condition of appointment in the service, her engagement was terminated with effect from 1st February, 2008. The question is whether such termination is just and proper. In order to answer the issue, it is necessary to refer to the relevant portion of the memorandum dated 25th January, 2006, issued by the Government of West Bengal, Department of Women and Child Development and Social Welfare, Kolkata, which is as under: I. All candidates will have to give a declaration regarding her maximum academic qualification. II. Candidates who are graduates will not be eligible for a post of Anganwadi Worker. If a graduate candidate suppresses her academic qualification and if selected to a post of Anganwadi Worker, her services will be terminated forthwith without assigning any reason. " 6. In this respect it is also relevant to refer to the fourth paragraph of the advertisement dated 5th July, 2006 wherein it was stipulated that a candidate having passed Madhyamik Examination or equivalent examination and a candidate belonging to the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe having passed class (VIII) would be eligible to apply. However, it was specifically stipulated that a graduate or a person having higher degree was barred from applying for the post. Pursuant to the advertisement the petitioner applied, became successful and joined. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 31st January, 2008 was issued terminating her service on the ground that she had given a false declaration. The said order is as under:- "Government of West Bengal Child Development Project Office Pandua Child Development and Welfare Project Pandua, Hooghly. Memo No. 37/PND/ICDS Dated 31.01.2008 Sender: Child Development Project Officer, Pandua Organisation Child Development and Welfare Project. To Smt. Sampa Dey Daughter of, Abani Kumar Dey Village- Bainchi gram, Post Office - Bainchi gram District - Hooghly. You are hereby informed that on the basis of your hearing in presence of the selection committee of the Pandua Child Development Project on 31.08.2008, it is proved that you have obtained the degree of graduate before publication of the notice for the post of Anganwari Worker. It means you have submitted false declaration in your application. So, as per condition of the appointment of your service for the post of Anganwari Worker terminated w.e.f. from 1st February 2008. It means you have submitted false declaration in your application. So, as per condition of the appointment of your service for the post of Anganwari Worker terminated w.e.f. from 1st February 2008. You will be informed later on whether any legal action will be taken against you for your false declaration regarding academic qualification. Immediately hand over all the charges of your Anganwari centre to your superior to take relief from the post of worker. Sd/ (illegible) Child Development Project Officer Pandua Child Development and Welfare Project Pandua, Hooghly." 7. It is evident that the petitioner has not denied that she was a graduate. Since there is no dispute that the petitioner had concealed in the application the fact that she was a graduate and as the advertisement dated 5th July, 2006 clearly bars the graduates from applying for the post, the impugned order is just and proper. In this context it is appropriate to refer to the judgment in Union of India and others v. Sukhen Chandra Das (supra) wherein it was held that furnishing of false information shall lead to termination Moreover, in Manoj Kumar (supra), relied on by the respondents, wherein the question was whether the appellant had given false information or suppressed any relevant or material information, it was held as under: "8. There is no doubt that if any candidate furnishes false or incomplete information or withholds or conceals any material information in his application, he will be debarred from securing employment. It is also true that even if such an applicant is already appointed, his services are liable to be terminated for furnishing false information." 8. Since in the case in hand the condition in the advertisement was specific and it was obligatory on the part of the candidates to give correct information as stipulated in the advertisement dated 5th July, 2006, and since in the case in hand the advertisement had stipulated that graduates were barred from competing, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Union of India and others v. Sukhen Chandra Das (supra) and in Manoj Kumar (supra) and in paragraphs 16 and 22 of the judgement in Rina Dutta (supra), the respondents were justified in issuing the order of termination without giving an opportunity of hearing. The orders passed in Manashi Ghosh (supra) and Chaitali Das (supra) are not applicable to the facts of the instant case in view of the clear stipulation in the advertisement prohibiting graduates from applying for the post of Anganwadi Worker. Therefore, no order is passed on the writ petitions. The writ petitions are dismissed. 9. No order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished on priority basis.