Patna High CourtCWJC/12731/2010dismissed

Smt.Anju Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-08-09Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12731 of 2010 =========================================================== Smt. Anju Kumari wife of Kamal Kishor Sah, resident of village Jajhat Sabaila, P.S. Singheshwar, District -Madhepura .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Madhepura

3. The District Welfare Officer, Madhepura

4. The Child Development Project Officer, Madhepura

5. The Sub-Divisional Education Officer cum Observer Gram Panchayat Jajhat, Subaila, Singheshwar, Madhepura

6. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Jajhat, Sabaila, P.S. Singheshwar, Madhepura

7. The Panchayat Sevak, Gram Panchayat, Jajhat Sabaila, P.S. Singheshwar, District -Madhepura

8. Chanda Devi wife of Chandu Razak, resident of Musahari Tola, Jajhat Sabaila, P.S. Singheshwar, District -Madhepura .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : Mr. Kumar Alok, SC 8 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-08-2017 The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Anganbari Sevika in Jajhat Musahari Tola Anganwari Kendra of Ward No. 10 in Jajhat Sabaila Panchayat in the district of Madhepura; and for quashing the appointment of the private respondent no. 8 to the said post.

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls.

3. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the respondent no. 8 oppose the writ petition with reference to their respective counter affidavits, inter alia, submitting that the selection of the petitioner by Aam Sabha has rightly not been

Patna High Court CWJC No.12731 of 2010 dt.09-08-2017 2/2 proceeded with as she belonged to the backward class and not from the majority category. The petitioner's complaint has been considered by the District Programme Officer, Madhepura and rejected by order dated 05.11.2009 (Annexure-R-8/I) against which the petitioner has alternative remedy under the guidelines.

4. Having regard to the stand of the respondents, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 14.08.2017 Transmission Date N.A.