Vrinda Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20273 of 2018 ====================================================== Vrinda Kumari Wife of Rajiv Kumar Ranjan, Resident of Village-Jamnipur, P.O.-Mango Bandar, P.S. -Anchal Khaira Gram Panchayat Knaraict, Ward No. 13 District-Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary Human Resource and Development department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate, and Collector Jamui 3.

The District Programme Officer, Jamui.

4.

The Child development Programme Officer, Jamui 5.

Priti Parihar Wife of Subhash Kumar, Resident of Village-Kalvanpur Under Nagar Parishad Jamui District-Jamui.

6.

Tunki Devi Wife of Prakash Paswan, Resident of Village-Jamanipur Centre no.66 Block Khaira, Dist.-Jamui.

7.

Pinki Devi Wife of Mukesh Kumar That Karakot Kala Pahar, P.O. Magobander Anchal Khaira Dist-Jamui.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey- AAG- 15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 30-09-2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.03.2018 passed by the District Magistrate and Collector, Jamui in Appeal No. 04 of 2017 by which he has appointed Tunki Devi (respondent No. 6) in Ward No. 13 and Centre No. 6 in post of Anganbari Sevika.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.20273 of 2018(2) dt.30-09-2024 2/2 case of the petitioner is on correct footing and the benefit has been granted to the private respondent and interference is required in this matter.

4. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the District Magistrate has passed a reasoned and speaking order in which he considered every aspect of the matter and the reason has also been assigned in the operative part of the said order.

5. Upon hearing both the parties, it transpires to this Court the specific reason has been assigned in the said order and the order is speaking order in its nature as such, this court is not interfering in this matter.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U