Sunita Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15239 of 2010 =========================================================== Sunita Sinha W/O Sri Rabindra Kumar Singh R/O Vill Ghosrawan, P.S.Giriyak, Distt-Nalanda .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Nalanda

3. The District Welfare Officer, Nalanda

4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Rajgrih, Distt-Nalanda

5. The Block Development Officer, Giriyak, Distt-Nalanda

6. The Child Development Project Officer, Giriyak, Distt-Nalanda

7. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Ghosrawan, Block-Giriyak, Distt-Nalanda

8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Ghosrawan, Block-Giriyak, Distt-Nalanda .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : GP14 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 24-07-2017 The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sevika of Gram Panchayat, Ghosrawan in Giriyak Block of Nalanda District.

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

3. A perusal of the writ petition discloses that earlier one Baby Devi had been appointed on the post of Anganwari Sevika, but she was subsequently terminated owing to submission of

Patna High Court CWJC No.15239 of 2010 dt.24-07-2017 forged mark sheet of matriculation examination. The petitioner is therefore, claimed that she be appointed as her name stood first in the merit list and her name was also approved by the aam sabha. It has been claimed that the said Baby Devi had been appointed with the connivance of the concerned officials.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand, opposed the writ petition with reference to the counter affidavit. It is denied that the petitioner stood first in the merit list or that her name had been approved by the aam sabha. In fact the petitioner stood at second position in the merit list. It is further submitted that according to the circular of ICDS, 2006, any fresh appointment could be made only after inviting fresh applications, once the appointment of Baby Devi was terminated on the ground of forgery. It is submitted that the merit list prepared in the year 2007 remained valid only for one year and as such fresh applications would have to be invited for making selection.

5. The facts stated in the counter affidavit have not been controverted as no rejoinder has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.

6. In the above circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition, which stands dismissed. I.A. No.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15239 of 2010 dt.24-07-2017 4799 of 2013 also stands disposed of.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 26.07.2017 Transmission Date N.A.