Patna High CourtCWJC/9070/2008disposed

Muni Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-04-06Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9070 of 2008 ====================================================== Muni Devi W/o Dhrub Yadav, R/V Rup Poiya P.S. Kateya Prakhand - Panchdevri District Gopalganj.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

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

4. The District Welfare Officer, Gopalganj.

5. The Sub Divisional Officer Gopalganj.

6. The Child Development Project Officer Panchdevri (Gopalganj). .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Mishra For the Respondent/s : AC to GA-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-04-2015 Heard Sri Ajay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C. to Govt. Advocate - 4. The petitioner, invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for directing the respondent particularly respondent no. 2/District Magistrate, Gopalganj to consider the representation, which relates to appointment of Anganbari Sevika of Kendra No. 151 of Rup Poiya under Panchdevri Block (Gopalganj).

It has been pleaded that the petitioner, in view of irregularities committed in the appointment of Anganbari Sevika of concerned centre, has filed the representation before the concerned District Magistrate, however; no action has been taken

Patna High Court CWJC No.9070 of 2008 (3) dt.06-04-2015 2/2 till date.

In this case, counter affidavit has been filed and it has been dispute that no such representation was filed. However, keeping in view the facts & circumstances, the Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to file complaint, in view of provisions contained in Clause 8 of the guidelines of appointment of Anganbari Sevika/Sahaika. If such complaint is filed supported with an affidavit before the District Magistrate, Gopalganj within a period of eight weeks from today, the Court expects that the District Magistrate may examine the matter and pass appropriate order in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of such complaint.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay/- U