Patna High CourtCWJC/17736/2016disposed

Bhawana Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-11-27Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17736 of 2016 ====================================================== Bhawana Kumari, Wife of Randhir Kumar Paswan, Resident of VillageParsauni, Gram Panchayat Raj- Madhopur Raushan, P.S. Dumara, DistrictSitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Integral Child Development Scheme, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Deputy Director, Social Welfare Department, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

5. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.

6. The District Programme Officer, Sitamarhi.

7. The Child Development Project Officer, Dumara Rural, District- Sitamarhi.

8. Ranjana Kumari, Wife of Hargen Paswan, Resident of Village- Parsauni, Gram Panchayat Raj- Madhopur Raushan, P.S. Dumara, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Prashant Pratap-GP-2 Mr. Asit Kumar Jha, A.C. to G.P.-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 27-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is challenging the order of the Child Development Project Officer, Dumara Rural, District- Sitamarhi, containing memo no.91 dated 08.02.2016, is with respect to appointment of respondent no.8, namely, Ranjana Kumari, as Anganbari Sahayika of Ward No.11, Centre No.123, Gram Panchayat Raj Madhopur Raushan, having stated

Patna High Court CWJC No.17736 of 2016(2) dt.27-11-2018 2/2 that the appointment of respondent no.8 is illegal and the Child Development Project Officer has wrongly issued the appointment order of respondent no.8.

If the petitioner is really aggrieved, he can approach the District Programme Officer, Sitamarhi, by way of filing a complaint. If such a complaint is filed, the District Programme Officer, shall consider and decide the same within a period of six months from the date of filing of complaint by the petitioner.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- U