Poonam Kumari @ Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9703 of 2008 =========================================================== Poonam Kumari @ Devi W/o Sri Pankaj Kumar Singh, resident of Village Pirganj, Poshak Kshetra- Diwandiha, P.S. Korha, District Katihar .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna
2. The Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, State of Bihar, Patna
3. The Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea
4. The District Magistrate, Katihar
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Katihar
6. The District Welfare Officer, Katihar
7. The Block Development Officer, Korha Block, District Katihar
8. The Chief Development Project Officer, Korha, District Katihar
9. The Mukhia cum Adhakshya Panchayat Level Selection Committee, Gram Panchayat Pawani, Korha Block, District Katihar
10. The Statistics Block Supervisor, Korha Block, District Katihar
11. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Pawani, District Katihar
12. Sukrita Devi w/o Subodh Kumar, Village, Pirganj, P.S. Korha, District Katihar .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar Karn Mr. Jayant Kumar Karn For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sharad Kumar Sinha, GP 15 Mr Surendra Kumar Chaubey Mr Surya Prakash =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-08-2015 Writ application is dismissed for the reason that the dispute relates to appointment of the year 2007 and the concurrent findings are that the selection of the private respondent per say did not seem to be erroneous because her husband was found to be a resident of the ward in question. The dominant caste representing the said ward belongs to unreserved category. Petitioner comes from the Backward class community. In view of the same, no relief is required
Patna High Court CWJC No.9703 of 2008 dt.10-08-2015 2/2 to be granted to the petitioner by interfering with the selection and appointment of respondent no.12 as an Aaganbari Sevika. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) sk U