Arti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8877 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. Arti Kumari wife of Raju Kumar Rajak resident of village- Phulwaria, Police Station- Gurua District- Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Social welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Director, ICDS (Integrated Child Development Scheme), Social welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

4. The Assistant Director, ICDS, Social welfare Department, Magadh Division, Gaya

5. The Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya

6. The District Magistrate, Gaya

7. The District Programme Officer, Gaya

8. The Child Development Project Officer, Gurua, Gaya

9. Nirmala Kumari, wife of Sri Anuj Kumar Nirala at present resident of villageBelauti Tola, Phulwaria, Police Station- Gurua, District- Gaya .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. ANIL KUMAR =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 24-08-2017 Heard both sides.

No notice was issued to respondent no. 9 Nirmala Kumari.

This writ petition is disposed of, at the request of learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 26.02.2014 passed by the District Programme Officer, Gaya in Case No. 54 of 2013 by which the selection of the petitioner has been cancelled and respondent no. 9 was selected for the post of Anganbari

Patna High Court CWJC No.8877 of 2014 dt.24-08-2017 Sevika at Anganbari Kendra, Phulwarea.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the District Programme Officer, Gaya did not issue any notice to the petitioner before cancellation of the selection of the petitioner. Let the case be remitted to the District Programme Officer, Gaya to hear the petitioner and pass order afresh but in the meantime petitioner be allowed to work.

On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, I remit the case to the District Programme Officer, Gaya with a direction to the District Programme Officer, Gaya to hear the petitioner and the respondent no. 9 and pass a fresh order within four months from today. In the meantime, the respondent no. 9 shall continue to work as Anganbari Sevika, if she is working. With this observation, this writ petition is disposed of. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) KKSINHA/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 30.08.2017 Transmission Date NA