Putul Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.888 of 2014 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8851 of 2013 ====================================================== Putul Devi, wife of Sri Amol Kumar Singh, resident of village Pachrukhi, P.O. Ranyodha, P.S. Dhankund (Dhoraiya), District- Banka ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar at Patna

3. The Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur

4. The Collector, Banka

5. The Senior Deputy Collector, Banka

6. The District Education Extension Officer, Banka

7. The District Programme Officer, Banka

8. The Child Development Project Officer, Dhoraiya District Banka

9. Sunaina Devi, W/o Sri Ashok Kumar Yadav, resident of village Pachrukhi, P.O. Ranyodha, Dhoraiya, District- Banka ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Basant Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Anwar Karim, A.C. to G.P. 10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 30-11-2018 Re: I.A. No. 4665 of 2014 Heard Shri Basant Kumar Mishra, learned counsel who has pointed out that the delay is of only 11 days.

2. The cause shown is sufficient and we condone

Patna High Court LPA No.888 of 2014 dt.30-11-2018 2/3 the delay in filing of the appeal and treat the appeal to be within time.

3. I.A. No. 4665 of 2014 stands allowed accordingly.

Re: L.P.A. No. 888 of 2014 Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the State, we find that this dispute relates to the selection of Anganbari worker which was sought to be assailed on two grounds; firstly, that the decision of the General Body was not appropriate inasmuch as the issue relating to the domination by the Backward Class community has not been correctly appreciated. The second ground of challenge was that the private respondent who was selected was related to the Sarpunch who was her own mother-in-law.

2. A finding has been returned to the effect that firstly the policy, with regard to the selection of the dominant class to be made, was adopted by the State Government and has been followed by the General Body. The second finding recorded is that the mother-in-law who is alleged to be the Sarpunch had already resigned at the time of the selection. Both are findings of fact which could not be disputed in this appeal before us. We do not find any error in the impugned judgment of

Patna High Court LPA No.888 of 2014 dt.30-11-2018 3/3 the learned Single Judge. The appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.

(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) (Anjana Mishra, J) P.K.P./-R.S.Sen AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 03.12.2018 Transmission Date