Soni Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4787 of 2019 ====================================================== Soni Kumari, wife of Sanjit Kumar Paswan, rersident of Village-Sivaisingpur Paswan Tola, PS- Mohiuddin Nagar in the district of Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Depaertment, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna Bihar 3.

The Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Pant Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna Bihar 4.

The Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga, Bihar 5.

The District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Samastipur, Bihar 6.

The District Programme Officer, Samastipur, Bihar 7.

The Child Development Project Officer, Mohiuddin Nagar, Samastipur Bihar 8.

The Ladies Supervisor, Child Development Project, Mohiuddin Nagar, Samastipur, Bihar 9.

Smt. Kiran Kumari, wife of Govind Kumar Paswan, resident of villageSivaisingpur, P.S- Mohiuddin Nagar, in the district of Samastipur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Md. Raisul Haque ( SC-10 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 28-03-2019 Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, after some arguments, seeks permission to withdraw this petition in order to enable the petitioner to ventilate her grievance by way of complaint/representation before the District Programme Officer, Samastipur (respondent No. 6) within a period of four weeks from today.

It may be noted here that even though the

Patna High Court CWJC No.4787 of 2019(2) dt.28-03-2019 2/2 petitioner was placed at serial No. 1 in the merit list, her claim was bypassed and private respondent No. 9 was appointed on the post of Anganbari Sevika. The reason for her claim being bypassed is that the educational certificates of the petitioner are not from a recognized institution and the claim of the candidate at serial No. 2 in the merit list has been rejected because of her not hailing from the concerned area for her to be considered for the said post. The District Programme Officer, Samastipur (respondent No. 6), therefore, is directed to look into all aspects of the matter, afford hearing to all the stake holders including the private respondent No. 9, who has been appointed on the post of Anganbari Sevika and if possible, the candidate at serial No. 2 and pass orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the observation/direction aforesaid.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Shageer/- U