Shayesta Naaz And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20654 of 2013 ====================================================== 1.

Shayesta Naaz and Anr Wife Of Md. Jawed Akbal Anganwari Sewika Of Centre No. 49, Centre Mojaburrahmn Tola Karor, Dighli, P.S. Palasi, District Araria As Also Resident Of Karor Dighli, Post Balua Kaligannaj, P.S. Palasi, District Araria 2.

Bibi Afsana Wife Of Rajabul Haque Anganwari Sahaiyaka Of Centre Ni. 49, Centre Mojaburrahman Tola Karor, Dighli, P.S. Palasi, District Araria As Also Resident Of Karor Dighli, Post Balua Kaliganaj, P.S. Palasi, District Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The District Magistrate, Araria 3.

The District Programme Officer, Araria 4.

The District Welfare Officer, Araria 5.

The Child Development Project Officer, Palasi Block, Araria ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Anjani Kr Sharan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 24-01-2023

1. The petitioners have prayed as under:- "(i) For quashing and setting aside the part of the newspaper publication (Annexure-8) dated 05.09.2013 whereby and whereunder posts of Anganwari Sewika and Sahaiyaka have been notified to be filled up as per extant norms of the Integrated Child Development Scheme Directorate as it also includes the posts validly held by these petitioners in Palasi Block;

(ii) For a direction upon the Respondents to keep a post of Sewika and Sahaiyaka vacant in Palasi Block inasmuch as the petitioners are still holding the posts after being validly selected in the year 2004; (iii) For a direction upon the Respondents to allow the petitioners to resume the functioning of

Patna High Court CWJC No.20654 of 2013(2) dt.24-01-2023 2/2 Centre No. 49 run by them as despite passage of more than four years no final decision has been taken and under false allegations they are not being allowed to operate the Centre;

(iv) For a direction upon the Respondents to pay the arrears of honorarium;"

2. The post of Anganwadi worker does not fall within the purview of the State or Subordinate Services and is a post under a scheme regulated by guidelines which are not enforceable in law. In view thereof, the writ petition would not lie with regard to the selection process of Anganwadi worker.

3. The writ petition is mis-concieved and is accordingly dismissed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U