Amrita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16472 of 2016 ====================================================== Amrita Kumari, Wife of Subodh Kumar Yadav, Resident of Village- Hirauti Tole, Bangtahi, P.S. Tariyani, District- Sheohar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Director, I.G.D.S., Indira Bhawan, Patna. 2.

The Collector, District- Sheohar.

3.

The District Programme Officer, Sheohar.

4.

The Child Development Project Officer, Tariyani, District- Sheohar. 5.

Rinki Kumari, Wife of Shiv Shankar Patel, Resident of Village- Kurhani, Ward no. 7, P.O. Hirota Dumma, P.S. Tariyani, District- Sheohar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Verma For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Anjani Kumar- AAG 4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-02-2023 In the writ application, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- "1. For issuance of Certiorari, quashing Order dated 07.06.2016 passed by the learned Collector, Sheohar in Anganbari Appeal No. 20/15 whereby he has rejected the Appeal filed by the petitioner without any legal consideration as well as the Order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the District Programme Officer, Sheohar vide Memo No. 293 in Case No. 4/2015 whereby petitioner's selection as Anganbari Sevika has been declared illegal.

2. For direction/order to the Respondents for appointment of the petitioner as Anganbari

Patna High Court CWJC No.16472 of 2016(2) dt.09-02-2023 2/2 Sevika in Anganbari Centre No. 156, Ward No. 6, Gram Panchayat, Hirota Dumma in Sheohar District."

Heard learned counsels for the parties.

The post of Anganbari Sevika / Sahahyka is not a post having security of tenure or protection under Article 311 of the Constitution of India. It does not fall within the purview of the State or subordinate services and is a post under a scheme regulated by guidelines of the State Government, which are not enforceable in law. The very nature of engagement provides for honorarium. It is purely a contractual engagement. In view thereof, the writ petition would not lie with regard to the selection process of Anganwadi worker and is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, while dismissing the writ petition, it is observed that if the petitioner still feels aggrieved, she may approach the competent authority.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U