Rita Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13200 of 2021 ====================================================== Rita Devi, aged about 38 years, female, Wife of Shailendra Kumar Singh Resident of Village - Khaira Jiwa - Bigha, Post Office - Kataya, Police Station- Amba, District- Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
The Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The District Magistrate, Aurangabad.
4.
The Additional Collector cum additional District Magistrate, Aurangabad. 5.
The District Programme Officer, Aurangabad.
6.
The Child Development Project Officer, Kutumba, Aurangabad. 7.
The Lady Supervisor, Kutumba, Aurangabad.
8.
The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat - Karma Basantpur, Block - Kutmba, District- Aurangabad.
9.
The Ward Member of Ward No. 07, Panchayat Karma Basantpur, Block - Kutumba, District- Aurangabad.
10.
Smt. Rinku Devi Wife of Sikendra Singh Resident of Village - Khaira, Jiwa Bigha, Post Office - Kataya, District- Aurangabad. 11.
Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr.Binod Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, AC to GP-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 20-10-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead the Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya, as Respondent No.11.
2/4
3. Without going into the merits of the allegations leading to petitioner's selection being cancelled, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the District Programme Officer dated 02-01-2021, passed in Anganwari Sevika/Sahaika Chayan Appeal Case No-16 of 2019, as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition, was assailed before the Additional Collector and the same has been rejected by order dated 16-04-2021, as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition. The submission is that the appeal was preferred since the District Programme Officer, while cancelling the petitioner's selection, had observed, in his order, as follows:
"सेवविकका कसे पद पर वकयसे गयसे चयन कको तत्ककाल प्रभकावि से रद्व करतसे हए अपपीलकारर्थी वरकक दसेविपी पवत वसकसेन्द वसकह,गकाम -खैरका जपीविका वबिगहका, पको०-कटखैयका, विकार्ड नक0-07, पकचकायतकमर्मा बिसकतपहर, प्रखण्र-कहटहम्बिका, वजलका-औरकगकाबिकाद में ऑगनबिकारपी सेवविकका कसे पद पर चयन करनसे कका आदसेश बिकाल वविककास पवरयकोजनका पदकावधिककारपी, कहटहम्बिका कको वदयका जकातका हखै इस आदसेश से अगर चयनमहक्त सेवविकका रपीतका दसेविपी असकतहष्ट हको तको एक मकाह कसे अन्दर वजलका दण्रकावधिककारपी -सह- समकाहतर्मा, औरकगकाबिकाद कसे न्यकायकालय में अपपील दकायर कर सकतपी हखै।"
4. However, it is not disputed by any of the parties that the guidelines for selection of Anganwari Sevika/Sahaika of 2019 had come into force w.e.f. 27-05-2019 by a letter, which explicitly repeals the earlier guidelines, including the guidelines of 2015 and 2016. Since the order of the District Programme Officer was much after coming into force of the
3/4 2019 guidelines, Clause 12 of the Guidelines would be applicable, which reads as follows:- "12. अपपील- बिकाल वविककास पवरयकोजनका पदकावधिककारपी कसे द्वकारका पकावरत आदसेश कसे वविरूद्ध 30 वदननों कसे भपीतर वजलका प्रकोगकाम पदकावधिककारपी कसे यहहाँ प्ररम अपपील दकायर कपी जका सकसेगपी। अपपील दकायर हकोनसे कपी वतवर से 45 वदननों कसे भपीतर वजलका प्रकोगकाम पदकावधिककारपी महखर आदसेश पकावरत करमेंगसे। वजलका प्रकोगकाम पदकावधिककारपी कसे द्वकारका पकावरत आदसेश कसे वविरूद्ध 30 वदननों कसे भपीतर सकबिकवधित प्रमकरल कसे प्रमकरलपीय आयहक्त कसे यहहाँ पहनरपीक्षण अपपील दकायर कपी जका सकतपी हखै तरका उनकसे द्वकारका पकावरत आदसेश अकवतम आदसेश हकोगका। वजलका प्रकोगकाम पदकावधिककारपी द्वकारका ससमय आदसेश पकावरत नहहीं करनसे कपी वसरवत में पवरविकाद सवित: प्रमकरलपीय आयहक्त कसे यहहाँ अगसकावरत हको जकायसेगपी और सकबिकवधित वजलका प्रकोगकाम पदकावधिककारपी कसे वविरूद्ध वनयमकानहसकार ककार्डविकाई कपी जकायसेगपी। "
5. From bare perusal of Clause 12, it is apparent that the Revisional/Appellate Authority for assailing the order of the District Programmme Officer is the Divisional Commissioner.
6. In view thereof, the order dated 16-04-2021, passed by the Additional Collector- cum-Addititional District Magistrate Aurangabad, in Anganwari Sevika/Sahaika Chayan Appeal Case No-04 of 2021, who is not competent Authority for entertaining the appeal under the 2019 guidelines, is quashed. The petitioner would be at liberty to assail the order before the Competent Authority being the Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division (Respondent No.11).
7. The petitioner has been misled by the order of the District Programmme Officer, Aurangabad (Respondent No.5) to avail the wrong remedy. Therefore, this Court would observe that
4/4 if the appeal is preferred within a period of 30 (Thirty) days from today, the same is required to be considered on merits without raising the issue, of the same being delayed.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 10 submits that she would be cooperating for disposal of the appeal expeditiously by appearing before the Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya (Respondent No.11) upon intimation regarding filing of the appeal.
9. The writ application is allowed to the extent indicated above.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) shyambihari/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 01-11-2022 Transmission Date