Patna High CourtL.P.A/1827/2017dismissed

Meena Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-03-26Mr. Justice S. Kumar,The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1827 of 2017 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12824 of 2013 =========================================================== Meena Devi, W/o Madan Kumar Das, Ex- Anganwari Sevika, Anganwari Centre No. 36, Harizan Tola, Panjwara Gram Panchayat, R/o Village- Panjwara Harizan Tola, P.S.- Panjwara, Anchal- Barahat, District- Banka. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through Director T.C.D.S., Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Banka.

3. The District Programme Officer, Banka.

4. The Child Development Project Officer, Barahat, Anchal- Barahat, DistrictBanka.

5. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Panjwara, P.S.- Barahat, Anchal- Barahat, District- Banka.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha, GA7 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 26-03-2018 Seeking exception to an order dated 23.11.2017 passed in CWJC No. 12824 of 2013 this appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patna. The petitioner--appellant was working as Anganwari Sevika in the centre in question and on inspection done of the centre various irregularities were found and, therefore, the District Programme Officer, Banka terminated her contract. Appeal filed was dismissed by the District Magistrate, Banka and in the writ petition the learned Writ Court found that the appellant was found to be absent from the place of working, various irregularities in the Take Home Ration (T.H.R.) for distribution among the beneficiaries were found, a videography was

Patna High Court LPA No.1827 of 2017 dt.26-03-2018 2/2 prepared wherein the petitioner was found to have manipulated in the distribution and use of T.H.R. and taking note of all the circumstances the learned Writ Court refused to interfere into the matter.

We find no reason warranting reconsideration. The appeal stands dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (S. Kumar, J) mrl./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date27.03.2018 Transmission Date