Patna High CourtCWJC/10730/2014dismissed

Anandi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-08-14Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 10730 of 2014 =========================================================== Anandi Kumar Son of Late Satyadeo Singh resident of Village - Belawon, P.S. Kaler District - Arwal .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Secretary SAMAJ KALYAN BIBHAG

2. The Commissioner, Gaya, Magadh

3. District Magistrate, Arwal

4. The Welfare Officer, District Arwal

5. District Programme Officer, Arwal

6. Child Development Programme Officer, Kaler, District Arwal

7. Panchayat Secretary, Kaler, District - Arwal

8. Mukhiya Gram Panchayat, Belawon P.S. Kaler, District Arwal

9. Shiv Kumari Devi wife of Bharat Ram resident of Village - Belawon, P.S. Kaler District - Arwal posted as Sahiyaka under the Center no.21, Gram Panchayat - Belawon Uttari Kahar Toli, P.S. Kelar, District - Arwal .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr Vibhakar Kumar, Advocate For the S t a t e : M/s Ravi Kr, Amresh, ACs to GP XIII =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 14-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-State.

2 The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the appointment of respondent No 9 as Angan Bari Sahayika in Belawon Gram Panchayat Angan Bari Centre in the district of Arwal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a social worker. Specific averment to this effect is made in the writ petition. Petitioner is not a candidate in the selection

Patna High Court CWJC No.10730 of 2014 dt.14-08-2018 2/2 process leading to selection of respondent No 9. The petitioner can, by no stretch of imagination, be said to be having a rival interest with respondent No 9.

3 In view of the aforesaid situation, the writ petition, as framed by the petitioner, remains academic. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the selection of respondent No 9. 4 Writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 14.08.2018 Transmission Date NA