Soni Murmu v. The State Of Bihar,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11402 of 2025 ====================================================== Soni Murmu Wife of Vijay Hansda Resident of Village - Bansarsi Tola, Ward no. 05, Panchayat-Singhimari, Block- Dighalbank, P.S.- Kodhobari, DistrictKishanganj. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretray Department of Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Principal Secretary Department of Social Welfare, Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Director, (ICDS), Department of Social Welfare, Bihar, Patna. 4.
The Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea Magistrate Cum Collector. 5.
The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Kishanganj. 6.
The District Progrmme Officer (ICDS), Kishangaj. 7.
The Child Development Programme Officer (CDPO), Dighalbank DistrictKishanganj. 8.
The Concerned Lady Supervisor (ICDS) Dighalbank, Distirct-Kishanganj. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Amal Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Ms. Binita Singh, SC-28 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 28-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 10.05.2025 passed in Anganwari Appeal No. 51/2024 by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Kishanganj, as well as the order contained in Memo No. 751 dated 05.05.2022 issued by the District Programme Officer, Kishanganj, and further, for a direction to reappoint the
Patna High Court CWJC No.11402 of 2025 dt.28-07-2025 2/3 petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was selected for the post of Anganwari Sevika at Anganwari Centre No. 197 in Ward No. 5, Block Dighalbank, District Kishanganj, in accordance with the decision taken in the general meeting of the ward.
4. It is further submitted that the petitioner was removed from service by Memo No. 751 dated 05.05.2022, issued by the District Programme Officer, Kishanganj, on the ground of being absent from duty for more than 15 days without prior information, as per Clause 11(kh) of the guidelines. Counsel contends that the petitioner was unaware of her removal and, due to lack of knowledge and incorrect legal advice, initially filed an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Purnea, which was rejected for want of jurisdiction, granting liberty to approach the District Magistrate. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Kishanganj, along with a delay condonation application. However, the appeal was rejected without due consideration of the petitioner's case.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the order passed in Anganwari Appeal No. 51/2024,
Patna High Court CWJC No.11402 of 2025 dt.28-07-2025 3/3 which is under challenge, has considered all relevant aspects of the case before rejecting the appeal.
6. Upon perusal of the records, it appears that the operative portion of the impugned order sets out a detailed timeline of events, including the petitioner's unauthorized absence from duty from 28.12.2021 onwards. The decision was taken in accordance with the applicable rule, which provides that absence for more than 15 days without notice, followed by verification of continued absence, warrants removal from service. The impugned orders appear to have been passed in conformity with the applicable rules and do not suffer from any legal infirmity. Accordingly, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the same.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 28/07/2025 Transmission Date NA