Raghav Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7695 of 2015 ====================================================== Raghav Choudhary son of Yogendra Choudhary, resident of Village Naruar, P.S. Bhairav Asthan, District Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Principal Secretary, Department of Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.

Deputy Director, Welfare, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga 4.

District Programe Officer, Madhubani 5.

Child Development Project Officer, Jhanjharpur, district Madhubani 6.

Bharti Devi wife of Raj Kumar Jha, resident of village Naruar, P.S. Bhairav Asthan, district Madhubani.

7.

Shivdai Devi wife of Ratan Mukhia, resident of village Naruar, P.S. Bhairav Asthan, district Madhubani.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Md.Imteyaz Ahmad For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Aag10- P.N.Shahi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 18-06-2019 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the respondents-State.

Petitioner claiming to be a social worker has filed this writ petition assailing the order dated 27.02.2015/02.03.2015 passed by the appellate authority in Anganbari Sevika/Sahayika Appeal no. 85/2014 whereby and whereunder appeal of private respondent nos. 6 and 7 has been allowed.

Earlier private respondents were proceeded against on account of some irregularity in running of the center where they were working as Sevika and Sahayika. District Programme

Patna High Court CWJC No.7695 of 2015(2) dt.18-06-2019 2/2 Officer, Madhubani after hearing the parties on 26.05.2014 had removed the private respondents by canceling their selection as Anganbari Sevika and Sahiyaka of Center no. 137, Mallah Tol, Naruara within Jhanjharpur block in the district of Madhubani. When private respondents availed their departmental remedy, their appeal was allowed and the order of the District Programme Officer, Madhubani was set aside with direction to recover MANDEY of one month of the private respondents and private respondents were reinstated.

The order has been passed by the competent authority under the guideline and after hearing the concerned parties by adopting procedure prescribed under the guideline. This court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Deputy Director, Welfare, Darbhanga Division Darbhanga. Writ petition is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) s.hassan/- U