Patna High CourtCWJC/13676/2016dismissed

Pramod Kumar Nirala v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-09-06Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh,The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13676 of 2016 ========================================= Pramod Kumar Nirala, Son of Asharfi Lal, Resident of Mohalla - Kamla Nehru Nagar, Behind G.P.O., Police Station - Kotwali, District - Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The District Magistrate, Patna.

3. The Director, I.C.D.S. Directorate, Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Programme Officer, Patna.

5. The Child Development of Project Officer, Sadar-II, Patna.

6. The Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna.

7. Anita Kumari, Wife of Ram Suresh Kumar, Resident of Paltubigha, Police Station - Makhdumpur, District - Jehanabad. .... .... Respondent/s ========================================= Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pancham Lal Jaiswal, Adv. For the State : Mr. K.K. Jha, AAG-8 Mr. Amish Kumar, AC to AAG-8 ========================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT & ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH) Date: 06-09-2016

Patna High Court CWJC No.13676 of 2016 dt.06-09-2016 2/2 This application, under Article of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner, in the shape of Public Interest Litigation, seeking cancellation of selection of respondent No. 7, as Anganbari Sevika.

2. We have heard Mr. Pancham Lal Jaiswal, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. K.K. Jha, learned Additional Advocate General No. 8, appearing on behalf of the respondents-State of Bihar.

3. The petitioner is an organization, claiming to have been set-up for fighting corruption in the society.

4. Upon perusal of the pleadings on record, we are of the view that this is basically a service matter, which cannot be entertained in a Public Interest Litigation, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Further, it appears to Court that the papers relating to the selection, in question, have been furnished by the aggrieved participants in the concerned process to challenge the selection of the petitioner.

5. This application lacks bona fide and is, accordingly, dismissed.

(I. A. Ansari, CJ.) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Praveen-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 12.09.2016 Transmission Date N/A