Pinki Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17066 of 2010 =========================================================== Pinki Kumari W/o Shri Rabi Pandit, resident of village Aurabari, Gram Panchayat Raj Mahua, Block & P.S.- Barahat, District - Banka .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Banka

4. The District Programme Officer, Banka

5. The Child Development Project Officer, Barahat, Banka

6. The District Welfare Officer, Banka

7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Mahua, Block- Barahat, District - Banka

8. Smt. Sunita Kumari W/o Sri Madan Mohan Singh, resident of village Aurabari Gram Panchayat Raj, Mahua, Block- Barahat, District - Banka .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. HARISH KUMAR For the Respondents : Mr. AC to SC3 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed as the petitioner is aggrieved by a decision of the Selection Committee dated 11.11.2009 by which the petitioner's claim for selection on the post of Anganbari Sevika has been rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Selection Committee had found the petitioner otherwise eligible and suitable for the post of Anganbari Sevika, however, her case was rejected on the complaint of other applicants, namely, Sunita Kumari and Seema Devi that the petitioner's father-in-law was working in the

Patna High Court CWJC No.17066 of 2010 dt.27-07-2017 2/2 Railway which was contrary to the guidelines. It is submitted that no notice nor any opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner before the decision was taken by the Selection committee.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents points out that the petitioner has already approached before the concerned authorities with representations dated 17.11.2009 and again on 24.11.2009.

5. Having regard to the nature of the grievance of the petitioner and with consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Programme Officer, Banka (respondent no. 4) for redressal of her grievances. If any such representation is filed by the petitioner within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and disposed of after grant of opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously and in any event within a period of three months thereafter.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A Uploading Date 28.07.2017 Transmission Date N.A.