← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/20750/2013dismissed

Husn Raj v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2023-01-24Mr. Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 20750 of 2013 ====================================================== Husn Raj Wife Of Jamil Akhtar @ Md. Mangla Resident Of Village - Madhepur, Ward No.11, P.S. Balrampur, District - Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Director, Special Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna, I.C.D.S. 3.

The District Magistrate, Katihar 4.

The District Programme Officer, Katihar 5.

The Child Development Project Officer, Balrampur, District - Katihar 6.

The Ward Member Cum - Chairman, Selection Committee, Ward No.11, Grampanchayatraj - Kamra, P.S. Bal 7.

Rubi Khatoon Wife Of Barik Resident Of Village - Madhepur, Ward No.11, P.S. Balrampur, District - Katihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nafisuzzoha For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, GP-26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 24-01-2023

1. The petitioner has prayed as under:- "(i) For issuance of writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order/orders or direction for commanding the respondent authorities to hold the claim of the petitioner for the post of Anganwari Sevika, in her favour as the petitioner is natural and genuine candidate for the same post.

(ii) For issuance any writ, order/orders or direction for commanding the respondent authorities to select the candidate for the Anganwari Sevika by removing the private respondent no-7, as she has illegally been appointed by the respondent selection committee."

2. The post of Anganwadi worker does not fall within

Patna High Court CWJC No. 20750 of 2013(2) dt.24-01-2023 2/2 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