Farzana Parween v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 20111 of 2018 ====================================================== Farzana Parween W/o Late Gulam Sarwar, D/o Md. Sayeed Ansari, R/o Muhalla- Pathan Toli, P.O.- Sasaram, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare 2.

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

The District Magistrate, Rohtas 4.

The Deputy Development Commissioner, Rohtas 5.

The District Programme Officer, Rohtas 6.

The Block Development Officer, Kargahar, Rohtas 7.

The Child Development Project Officer, Kargahar, Rohtas ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr D K Sinha, Sr Advocate with Mr Abhinay Raj, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr Prashant Pratap, GP II Mr Lala S N Rais, AC to GP II ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 29-11-2022 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

The petitioner, a Lady Supervisor, was removed on grounds of alleged corruption.

Learned senior counsel submits that the Assistant Director -cum- Incharge Officer, Integrated Child Development Scheme, under order dated 26.06.2019 bearing Memo No 3229, had forwarded the petitioner's complain regarding the action taken against her, to the District Magistrate, Rohtas. The

Patna High Court CWJC No.20111 of 2018(2) dt.29-11-2022 2/2 District Magistrate had been directed to examine the matter and proceed thereafter in accordance with law. It is submitted that beyond this order of the Assistant Director as of today, he is not in a position to inform the Court what has happened as a result thereof.

In view of such submission, this writ petition is disposed of.

The petitioner shall be at liberty to assail any consequential order, if the same is found to be to the petitioner's prejudice, as a result of the exercise arising out of order dated 26.06.2019, taken note of above.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U