Ragini Priyadarshni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9517 of 2020 ====================================================== Ragini Priyadarshni, Daughter of Digvijay Prasad Singh, Wife of Dipak Kumar Chaudhary @ Deepak Kumar Chaudhary, resident of VillageManjuroha, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi and at present resident of road no.-4/31, Chankya Vihar Colony, Gobarsahi, P.O.- Khabra, P.S.- Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Director, Department of Integrated Child development, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Secretary Department of Integrated Child development, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Commissioner, Tirhut Range, Tirhut Commissionary, DistrictMuzaffarpur. 5.

The District Magistrate, District- Sitamadhi. 6.

The Addl. Collector Sitamarhi Sadar, Sitamarhi. 7.

The Sub- Divisional Officer District- Sitamadhi. 8.

The District Program Officer Department of Intergrated Child Development, Sitamadhi.

9.

The District Welfare Officer District- Sitamadhi. 10.

The Child Development Project Officer Block- Runnisaidpur, DistrictSitamadhi. 11.

Anima Kumar Wife of Satish Shankar Thakur, Resident of Village- Majroha, Gram Panchayat Raj Mahindwara, ward no.-2, Block and P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamadhi.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Md. Raisul Haque, SC-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 04-01-2022 This matter is heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of COVID-19 Pandemic.

2. Service of notice to respondent no.11 is dispensed with, since no adverse order is passed against her.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Patna High Court CWJC No.9517 of 2020 dt.04-01-2022 2/2

4. The petitioner has questioned the validity of the selection and appointment of 11th respondent before the Appellate Authority and the appeal is pending consideration.

5. Therefore, the Appellate Authority is hereby directed to decide the petitioner's appeal after due opportunity of hearing to both petitioner and 11th respondent and proceed to pass speaking order after due consideration of the contention raised by the petitioner as well as 11th respondent.

6. The above exercise must be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) uday/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 11.01.2022 Transmission Date NA