Mosarrat Pravin v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4357 of 2015 ===========================================================

1. Mosarrat Pravin wife of Nausad Ansari, resident of Village Ramdih, P.S. Jhajha, District Jamui.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Director, I.C.D.S., Bihar, Patna.

2. The Director, I.C.D.S. Directorate, Govt. of Bihar, Indira Bhawan, Patna.

3. The Deputy Director, Department of Social Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Munger Division, Munger.

4. The District Magistrate, Jamui.

5. The District Programme Officer, Jamui.

6. The C.D.P.O. Jhajha, District Jamui.

7. Mokida Khatoon wife of Zafar Eqawal Ahmad, resident of village Ramdih, P.S. Jhajha, District Jamui.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siya Ram Sahi Mr. Om Prakash Maharaj For the Respondent/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar, AC to GP 14 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-03-2015 A K Tripathai, J.

The order under challenge is the decision rendered in Case No.61/2013 by the Deputy Director, Welfare, Munger Division, Munger. The impugned decisions is dated 17/1/2015 and contained in Annexure-6. By virtue of this decision, the appeal of the petitioner stands rejected. A detailed consideration has been made with regard to the objection and the claim of the petitioner for selection as Anganwari Sevika.

2. It goes without saying that it is not an appointment under the State but an engagement on a fixed remuneration at most as an agent.

3. Certain guidelines dated 10.6.2013 have been talked about, issued by ICDS. If that guidelines stand then the reason for rejection of selection of the petitioner cannot be said to be illegal or irrational.

Patna High Court CWJC No.4357 of 2015 dt.25-03-2015 2 / 2

4. Writ application, therefore, is required to be dismissed as no infirmity has emerged in the impugned order.

5. Writ application is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) R.K.Pathak/- U