Babita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.812 of 2023 ====================================================== Babita Kumari W/o Sanjay Kumar R/o Village- Siveriaina, P.O.-Gidha, P.S.- Saraiya, District-Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Family and Social Welfare, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Director Integrated Child Development Services, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 4.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

5.

The District Programme Officer, (I.C.D.S.), Muzafarpur. 6.

The Child Development Project Officer, Saraiya District-Muzaffarpur. 7.

The Lady Supervisor-Cum Member Secretary Selection Committee I.C.D.S. Office, Saraiya, District-Muzaffarpur 8.

Gulshan Khatoon D/o Md. Jafar W/o Md. Afroz, Resident of VillageSiveriaima,P.S.-Saraiya, District-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raju Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Gyan Prakash Ojha (GA7) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 17-04-2023 Petitioner, in the present case, is seeking a direction to the District Programme Officer (ICDS), Muzaffarpur (Respondent No. 5).

According to the petitioner, she has lodged a complaint bearing Complaint Case No. 89/2020 (Annexure '4'), in which she has made complaint that the selected candidate for the post of Anganbari Sewika Centre No. 333, Ward No. 05, situated in village - Panchayat - Bahilwala, Govind, within Saraiya Anchal of District - Muzaffarpur, is having two matriculation certificates. Her date of birth mentioned as per the

Patna High Court CWJC No.812 of 2023(2) dt.17-04-2023 2/2 certificate of Madarsa is 10.03.1998 whereas her matriculation examination certificate shows her date of birth as 04.08.1996. Learned counsel submits that for more than three years the complaint is pending and the respondent no. 5 is not hearing the parties.

Learned counsel for the State submits that in such circumstance, appropriate direction may be issued to respondent no. 5 to dispose of the complaint of the petitioner after hearing both the sides.

Having regard to the submissions noted hereinabove, this Court directs respondent no. 5 to examine complaint case no. 89/2020 and after hearing both the sides pass an appropriate reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

This Writ Application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) lata/- U