Patna High CourtCWJC/2273/2016disposed

Madhu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-11-20Mr. Justice Jyoti Saran2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2273 of 2016 ====================================================== Madhu Kumari Wife of Sri Ajay Kumar Resident of Village- Bhandra Panchayat- Lakhai, P.S- Barhat, District- Jamui. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The District Magistrate, Jamui.

3. The District Programme Officer, Jamui.

4. The Director I.C.D.S., Bihar, Patna.

5. The Child Development Project Officer, Barhat, in District Jamui.

6. The Block Development Officer, Barhat in District- Jamui. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukul Jee, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Singh, SC12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 20-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the selection process for appointment of Anganwari Sevika, Anganwari Kendra No. 35 in the district of Jamui.

Undisputedly all issues arising from a selection process for appointment of Anganwari Sevika/ Sahaika is regulated under the guidelines issued by the State Government and the forum provided for filing of such complaint in the present case, is before the District Programme Officer, Jamui (respondent no.3) whose order is appealable before the District Magistrate, Jamui. Admittedly the petitioner has not exhausted the remedy so available to her.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2273 of 2016 (2) dt.20-11-2017 In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of and the petitioner, if so advised, may file her complaint before the District Programme Officer, Jamui and it goes without saying that any such complaint being filed by the petitioner within four weeks from today would be considered and disposed of by the District Programme Officer, Jamui in accordance with law and with opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the other contesting party, if any. An expeditious disposal within three months of filing of such complaint would be appreciated. (Jyoti Saran, J) Surendra/- U