Kumari Sonam v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6167 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. Kumari Sonam Wife Of Jay Shankar Kumar Resident Of Village - Gadhia, P.S. - Madhepura, District - Madhepura .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate cum Collector, Madhepura

3. The District Programme Officer, Madhepura

4. The Chief Development Project Officer, Madhepura

5. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Balam Gadhia, Madhepura

6. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Balam Gadhiya, District - Madhepura .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagendra Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. AJEET KUMAR =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 31-08-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.01.2012 passed by the Collector, Madhepura, as contained in memo No. 830, by which the selection of the petitioner from the post of Anganwari Sevika has been cancelled. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that name of the petitioner appears at serial No.4 in the merit list. One Babita Kumar was initially appointed but she was below 18 years of age on the date of appointment. The petitioner filed a petition before the Collector but in the meantime Babita Kumari resigned. Rima Kumari and Kumari Sangita did not turn up and, therefore, the Aam Sabha resolved to appoint the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sevika. After appointment the petitioner was sent up for training but the Collector without any cogent reason canceled the appointment of petitioner and ordered for making

Patna High Court CWJC No.6167 of 2014 dt.31-08-2017 2/2 fresh appointment in accordance with law.

I find no force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as from perusal of the order itself, it appears that the Mukhiya illegally appointed the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sevika although the candidates appearing at serial No. 2 and 3 were not given opportunity, after resignation of Babita Kumar from the post of Anganwari Sevika. It was found that appointment of the petitioner was illegal and Annexures-7 and 8 are consequential orders. It has also come in the counter affidavit that process of appointment has already been completed.

I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the fresh appointment process, she may file another writ petition.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 04.09.2017 Transmission Date N.A.