Shabana Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7310 of 2016 ====================================================== Shabana Khatoon wife of Abul Kalam resident of Jolhania, Arman Haji Tola, Gram Panchayat Pathara North, East, ward No - 2 Block - Pipra District - Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa.

4.

The Director, Directorate of I.C.D.S., Supaul. 5.

The District Magistrate, Supaul.

6.

The District Programme Officer ICDS, Supaul.

7.

The Block Development Officer, Pipra, District Supaul. 8.

The Child Development Programme Officer, Pipra Block - Pipra, District - Supaul.

9.

The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Pathara North, East, Block - Pipra, District - Supaul.

10.

Neha Praveen wife of Noor Mohammad resident of Jolhania, Arman Haji Tola, Gram Panchayat Pathara North, East, Block - Pipra District - Supaul. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nafisuzzoha, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Ms. Binita Singh, SC-28 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 13-10-2023 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "1(A). For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for setting aside the order dated 0403-2016 passed by Collector, Supaul in Aanganbari Appeal Case No-313/2015-58/2015 as well order dated 29-04-2015 passed by District Programme Officer (ICDS), Supaul in Case No.

09/2013, whereby and whereunder selection of

Patna High Court CWJC No.7310 of 2016(2) dt.13-10-2023 2/2 the petitioner on the post of Anganbari was held wrong and illegal and order dated 29-04-2015 passed by the District Programme Officer (ICDS), Supaul was upheld and denied for any interference [B] For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction to set aside the appointment letter dated 08-08-2015 issued to the private respondent whereby private respondent was appointed in place of the present petitioner.

[C] For issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction to stay the operation of the order dated 04-03-2016 passed by Collector Supaul in Aanganbari Appeal Case No-313/2015-58/2015."

2.

After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law including that of filing a suit before the learned Civil Court having competent jurisdiction. Liberty, so sought, is granted. 3.

The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U