Savita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14223 of 2019 ====================================================== Savita Kumari wife of Dilip Sah resident of Village Bharho, Ward No. 8 under Sarmastpur Gram Panchayat, Police Station Mahnar, District Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

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

3.

The Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme, (I.C.D.S.), Patna. 4.

The District Magistrate, Vaishali.

5.

The District Program Officer, Vaishali.

6.

The Child Development Project Officer, Mahnar, Vaishali. 7.

Munni Kumari wife of Satyendra Kumar resident of Village- Bharho, Ward No. 8 under Sarmastpur Gram Panchayat, Police Station Mahnar, District Vaishali.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar Sinha 2 For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S.K.Mandal (SC-3) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-07-2019 The petitioner, who is also an aspirant for being considered for engagement on the post of Anganbari Sevika in Anganbari Centre No. 165 situated in Ward No. 8 of Bharho village in the district of Vaishali, is aggrieved by the appointment of private respondent No. 7 on such post.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that her appointment is de-hors the rules as her educational certificates are under cloud.

Patna High Court CWJC No.14223 of 2019(2) dt.17-07-2019 2/2 The petitioner, under the new guidelines of 2019, is directed to make a complaint, if so advised, before the C.D.P.O., Mahnar, Vaishali (respondent No.

6) within a period of three weeks from today, who, on receipt of such complaint shall look into the matter and pass a reasoned order within the period specified under the guidelines of 2019. If for any reason, a final order is not passed by the C.D.P.O., Mahnar, Vaishali, the case would automatically stand transferred to the District Programme Officer, Vaishali, who would be under an obligation to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. If the petitioner still feels aggrieved, she would have an opportunity of preferring a revision before the concerned Divisional Commissioner.

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Shageer/- U