Patna High CourtCWJC/18054/2011dismissed

Lakashmi Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-04-28Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18054 of 2011 ====================================================== Lakashmi Devi , wife of Bihari Lal Rai, resident of village Katasar, police station - Amanaur, District Saran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary Welfare Government of Bihr, Patna

2. The Director Department of Social Welfare Government of Bihar Patna

3. The Commissioner Saran at Chapra

4. The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra

5. The District Programme Officer, Saran at Chapra

6. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Saran at chapra

7. The District Welfare Officer, Saran at Chapra

8. The Child Development Project Officer, Amanaur, District saran

9. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Katasar, District Saran .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Tiwary For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 28-04-2016 Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GA No. 9.

The petitioner, invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has made a prayer for directing the respondents to accept her application for the post of Anganbari Sevika which was advertised in the year 2010 itself.

In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 2 to 4 and 8 in paragraph no. 6 a specific stand has been taken that the petitioner has made incorrect and wrong

Patna High Court CWJC No.18054 of 2011 (3) dt.28-04-2016 2/2 statement regarding submission of application. The averment made in the counter affidavit has not been disputed by way of filing any rejoinder.

Keeping in view the fact that prayer has been made for accepting application for an advertisement published in the year 2010 itself and the statement in the counter affidavit that petitioner has made incorrect statement regarding submission of application, at this juncture no order can be passed. Moreover, such disputed question can not be decided while exercising writ jurisdiction.

The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U