Afsana Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2175 of 2021 ====================================================== Afsana Khatoon W/o Ashral Ali Ansari Resident of Village and Post OfficeRajandih, P.S. Rajpur, District-Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar represented through Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Director, ICDS, Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Collector-Cum-District-Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram. 5.

The District Programme Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram. 6.

The Child Development Project Officer, Rajpur, Rohtas. 7.

Female Supervisor, ICDS, Rajpur Block, District-Rohtas. 8.

Ward Member, Ward No.3, Panchayat-Rajandih Block-Rajpur, DistrictRohtas. 9.

Ragini Devi W/o Om Prakash Sah Resident of Village and Post OfficeRajandih, P.S.-Rajpur District-Rohtas. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baban Kumar, Adv.

Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr.Sunil Kr. Mandal, SC-3 Ms.Neelam Kumari, AC to SC-3 For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Lalit Kishore ( AG ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 07-02-2024

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1.i. For quashing of order dated 5/4/2019 passed by the Collector-cum- District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in Aganwari Appeal Case No. 02/2019 (Ann-P/3) whereby and where under the learned Court of Collector-Cum- District Magistrate has rejected the appeal.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2175 of 2021(3) dt.07-02-2024 2/2 ii. For quashing of letter No 0675 dated 18/8/18 (Ann-P/2) written by the District Programme officer, Rohtas at Sasaram to the Child Development Project Officer-Rajpur whereby and Whereunder the selection letter to the post of Anganwari Sevika has been quashed."

2. At the outset, 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 for redressal of her aforesaid grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.

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