Neelam Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7866 of 2010 =========================================================== Neelam Kumari wife of Suryadeo Paswan, resident of village- Mohiuddinpur, Block- Karai Parsurai, P.S.- Hilsa, District - Nalanda .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. Principal Secretary Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. Director, I.C.D.S., Government of Bihar, Patna

4. Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna

5. District Magistrate-Cum-Collector Nalanda

6. District Welfare Officer, Nalanda

7. District Programme Officer Nalanda

8. Child Development Project Officer, Karai Parsurai

9. Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Gondu Bigha, Nalanda

10. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Gondu Bigha Nalanda .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : Mr. GP20 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-08-2017 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order vide letter no. 76 dated 05.04.2010 (Annexure-3) passed by Child Development Project Officer, Karai Parsurai, Nalanda whereby and whereunder decision has been taken to cancel the candidature of petitioner for selection of Anganbari Sevika and also direction has been given to the respondent authorities, namely, Panchayat Secretary/ Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Gondu Bigha to commence the general meeting of Panchayat for continuing the selection process after cancellation of candidature of petitioner; and for connected reliefs.

Patna High Court CWJC No.7866 of 2010 dt.09-08-2017 2/2

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls.

3. Learned counsel for the State submits that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity and the petitioner's candidature has rightly been cancelled on the ground that the petitioner's father was in government service, which constituted disqualification for her selection. Moreover, the petitioner has already filed a representation before the District Magistrate, Nalanda on 15.04.2010 (Annexure-5) for redressal of her grievances.

4. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the respondents, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A Uploading Date 14.08.2017 Transmission Date N.A