Urmila Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10457 of 2013 ====================================================== Urmila Kumari Daughter Of Late Shashidhar Sah Resident Of Village - Beldaur, P.O. & P.S. Beldaur, District - Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary Social Welfare Department Government Of Bihar At Patna

2. The Principal Secretary Social Welfare Department Government Of Bihar At Patna, District - Patna

3. The Director, I.C.D.S. Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna, District - Patna

4. The Collector Cum District Magistrate, Khagaria, District - Khagaria

5. The District Programme Officer, Khagaria, District - Khagaria

6. District Level Selection Committee, Khagaria

7. Neelam Devi Daughter Of Shri Jagdish Prasad Choudhary Resident Of Village Shumbha Gajee Ghat, P.S. Arauli, District - Khagaria

8. Meena Devi D/o Siraram Singh R/o Village+P.O.- Telihar, P.S Beldaul, DisttKhagaria.

9. Rekha Kumari D/o Thakkan Yadav R/o Vill- Aaura,P.O. Meghauna, P.S. Alouli, Distt- Khagaria.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. AC to AAG 4 For the Respondent No. 9.

:

Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 01-11-2018 Heard counsel for the petitioner, the respondent State and the private respondents.

The petitioner was an applicant for appointment as Anganbari Sevika. It is the case of the petitioner that 12-13 appointments were to be made and that only 11 appointments have been made. He submits that the appointment of respondent no. 7 was illegal and makes a claim that appointment letter be issued to the petitioner which has not been done till date. The matter has been heard in detail. The specific stand

Patna High Court CWJC No.10457 of 2013 dt.01-11-2018 2/2 of the respondent State in the last counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents no. 1 and 5 is that only 13 candidates were to be appointed. Out of 13 posts, 7 posts were marked for general category, 2 for EBC, 2 for BC and the remaining two vacancies were reserved for scheduled castes candidates against which the petitioner, who is a backward cast category candidate cannot be considered. The specific stand of the State with respect to respondent no. 7 is that originally in the merit list respondent no. 7 has been placed as General Category though he was member of the backward category. On rectification of this error she came to be placed in the final merit list above the petitioner at serial 4/A-114.

Specific stand of the respondents is that no one below the petitioner in merit has been appointed. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the State, the claim of the petitioner is not valid and justified. Writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.