Rinku Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15871 of 2019 ====================================================== Rinku Kumari, aged about 31 years, female, D/o Ram Sevak Mandal, Wife of Hari Shankar Prasad Resident of Village- Auraha, Kariaut, P.O.- Makhnaha, P.S.- Laukahi, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary. 2.

The Integrated Child Development Society through Director, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga. 4.

The District Magistrate, Madhubani.

5.

The District Programme Officer (Welfare), Madhubani. 6.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Phulparas, District Madhubani. 7.

The Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board through Chairman/Secretary, Patna, Bihar.

8.

Sunaina Kumari, Wife of Varun Kumar, Resident of Auraha, Kariaut, P.O.- Makhnaha, P.S.- Laukahi, District- Madhubani. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S. K. Mandal (SC-3) Mr. Satyam Shivam Sundaram, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 14-08-2019 Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, learned Advocate for the petitioner, after some arguments, seeks permission to withdraw this petition in order to enable the petitioner to challenge the appointment of private respondent No. 8 on the post of Aanganbari Sevika at the concerned Aanganbari Centre before the concerned C.D.P.O.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15871 of 2019 dt.14-08-2019 2/2 in the district of Madhubani.

2. Permission is accorded.

3. Should a complaint be filed within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be looked into by the concerned C.D.P.O., who, after hearing the parties, shall pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within a further period of 30 days as is mandated under the new Guidelines of 2019.

4. If the petitioner remains still dissatisfied with the order of the concerned C.D.P.O., she would have the option of challenging such order before the District Programme Officer, Madhubani in the first instance and, thereafter, in revision before the concerned Divisional Commissioner.

5. The petition stands disposed off as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) Praveen-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 19.08.2019 Transmission Date N/A