Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1673 of 2013 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 15925 of 2012 =========================================================== Sunita Devi W/O Sanjay Ram Resident Of Village- Barwa, P.O- Pindari, P.SInarwa, District- West Champaran. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Betitah.

3. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran.

4. The Child Development Project Officer, Mainatand, West Champaran.

5. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Barwa, P.O- Pindari, P.S- Inarwa, DistrictWest Champaran.

6. Kamla Devi W/O Yudhisthir Chandra Das Resident Of Barwa Colony, P.OPindari, P.S- Inarwa, District- West Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, AC to A.A.G.-4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 09-03-2017 There has been delay of two days in filing the appeal, for which I. A. No. 9247 of 2013 has been filed.

The limitation petition is allowed.

Delay is condoned.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and counsel for the State.

Appeal is directed against the order, dated 25.10.2013, passed by the Learned Single Judge, who refused to interfere with

Patna High Court LPA No.1673 of 2013 dt.09-03-2017 2/2 the order of the District Magistrate and Divisional Commissioner, who have all held that the appellant was disqualified to occupy the position of Anganwari Sevika, because in terms of the policy, the government itself has put a barrier for those persons, whose father is a government servant.

The plea of the appellant was considered by the Learned Single Judge that she had already married and, therefore, her status has altered, is of no avail, because the selection was earlier and marriage was a subsequent event.

Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) SKM/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE Uploading Date 10.03.2017 Transmission Date