Rekha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14258 of 2007 =========================================================== Rekha Kumari wife of Shri Bipin Ram, Resident of villae Haspur, P.S. Naya Gaon, Block Matihani, District Begusarai.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Deptt. Of Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Begusarai.

5. The District Welfare officer, Begusarai

6. The Block Development Officer, Matihani Block District Begusarai.

7. The Child Development Project Officer, Matihani Block, District Begusarai.

8. The Mukhiya Sonapur Gram Panchayat, Matihani Block District Begusarai.

9. The Panchayat Secretary, Sonapur Gram Panchayat, Matihani Block District Begusarai.

10. Kumari Babita W/o Nityanand Singh R/o village Hanspur, P.S. Matihani Dist. Begusarai.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, Advocate For the Respondents : AC to SC12 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 08-05-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the private respondent no.10 as also the State.

For the purpose of engagement as Sahayika in the Haspura centre within the Matihani Block of Begusarai the selection process as per the guidelines was initiated by the selection committee of the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner and respondent no.10 were applicants. The committee selected respondent no.10. The grievance of the petitioner is that her application was not placed before the Selection committee and that the respondent

Patna High Court CWJC No.14258 of 2007 dt.08-05-2015 2/2 no.10 does not belong to the 'Poshak Area' which is an essential requirement. The respondent no.10 and the State have controverted the same. There is another aspect also. The petitioner asserts that respondent no.10 is dead whereas the counsel for the respondent no.10, has stated, on instruction, that Kumari Babita wife of Nityanand Singh (respondent no.10) is alive. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after making submissions at some length, submits that the application be disposed of permitting the petitioner to ventilate her grievance before the appropriate authority/forum in accordance with law. The writ application is accordingly disposed of. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/- U