Ranju Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20408 of 2013 ====================================================== Ranju Devi Wife Of Sushil Ram Resident Of Village - Vijay Lalganj, P.O. - Dholbajja, P.S. - Rupauli, District - Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.
The Collector, Purnea 3.
The District Welfare Officer, Purnea 4.
The District Child Development Programme Officer, Purnea 5.
The District Deputy Development Commissioner, Purnea 6.
The Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhamdaha, District - Purnea 7.
The Sub-Divisional Child Development Officer, Dhamdaha, District - Purnea 8.
The Child Development Programme Officer, Rupauli, P.O. And P.S. Rupauli, District - Purnea 9.
The Block Development Officer, Block Rupauli, P.O. and P.S. Rupauli, District - Purnea 10.
The Child Development Project Supervisor, Rupauli Block, P.O. and P.S. Ruapuli, District - Purnea 11.
The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Lalganj P.O. - Dholbajja, P.S. Rupauli, District - Purnea 12.
Rekha Devi Wife Of Bilash Ram Resident Of Village - Lalganj, P.O. - Dholbajja, P.S. - Rupauli, District - Purnea ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
None For the Respondent/s :
None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 23-01-2023
1. No one appears.
2. The petitioner assails the order of the District Magistrate rejecting the appeal of the petitioner with regard to the non-appointment on the post of Anganwadi Worker. The post of Anganwadi Worker is not a cadre post and the same is
Patna High Court CWJC No.20408 of 2013(2) dt.23-01-2023 2/2 governed by guidelines issued in that respect. It is not a post under the State services and a writ petition therefore would not be maintainable with regard to the same. The appeal being heard by the District Magistrate is also under the guidelines issued for the said purpose. Keeping in view thereto, no interference is warranted in writ jurisdiction.
3. The writ petition is dismissed.
(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Suraj/- Item No. 61 U