Patna High CourtCWJC/11149/2014dismissed

Rajani Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-12-06Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11149 of 2014 =========================================================== Rajani Kumari Wife of Sri Satish Kumar Resident of New Bangali Tola, Postal Park, P.O- Postal Park, P.S- Jakkanpur, District- Patna .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, I.C.D.S., Directorate, Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Patna.

4. Deputy Director, Welfare, Patna Division, Patna.

5. The District Programme Officer, Patna.

6. The Child Development Project Officer, Patna Sadar-2 .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohan Kumar Singh, Advocate and Mr.Ramchandra Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mrs Binita Singh, SC 28 and Mr. KK Narayan, AC to SC 28 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-12-2017 The petitioner had earlier moved this Court in C.W.J.C.No. 6103 of 2013 challenging his removal from the post of Anganbari Sevika which was withdrawn vide order dated 12.4.2013 with liberty to file an appeal before the Collector, Patna. Having obtained such liberty, it appears that the petitioner preferred appeal bearing Anganbari Appeal No. 89 of 2013-14 before the Appellate authority, i.e., the Deputy Director, Welfare, Patna Division, Patna (respondent no.4). A copy of the said appeal has not been brought on record by the petitioner.

However, it is pointed out that the issues raised in the appeal, has not been considered. On perusal of the appellate order dated 16.12.2013, it appears that the matter was considered by a reasoned order.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11149 of 2014 dt.06-12-2017 have not been considered as alleged by the petitioner. Order of the appellate authority appears to be a reasoned order, passed after considering the various points and after hearing the counsel for the appellant.

In view of the aforesaid discussions, there does not appear any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is thus dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Shashi.

NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date7.12.2017 Transmission Date NA