Masheda Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2118 of 2011 ====================================================== Masheda Khatoon wife of Md. Abu Talib resident of MohallaBudhuchak, Officer Colony, Katihar, Police Station - Katihar, District - Katihar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Katihar

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Katihar

4. The Child Development Project Officer, Block Katihar, Distt.- Katihar

5. The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Katihar

6. The Ward Commissioner, Ward No.6, Katihar

7. The Member, Secretary Selection Committee, Ward No.6, Katihar

8. The Yasmin wife of Md. Anwar Alam Presently r/o Budhu Chak, P.S.- Katihar, District - Katihar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Rahmatullah For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-02-2016 In the present writ petition the petitioner has virtually assailed the order passed by the District Collector , Katihar in Case No. 06 of 2010 whereby the claim of the petitioner for being selected and appointed as 'Anganbari Sevika' was rejected. The advertisement for the said post was published in the year 2006 and as per the provision contained in Clause 11 of the Guidelines for selection of Anganbari Sevika and Sahayika, 2006, there was statutory remedy for approaching the Divisional Commissioner and instead of availing statutory remedy the petitioner directly approached this court invoking its writ jurisdiction. Accordingly

Patna High Court CWJC No.2118 of 2011 (10) dt.18-02-2016 2/2 instead of going into the merit of the case the court proposes to dispose of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to avail statutory remedy.

It goes without saying that if within a period of eight weeks from today the petitioner files application before the Divisional Commissioner, the Divisional Commissioner may examine the same on its own merit without being prejudiced with this order and pass appropriate order within a period of three months from the date of filing of such application. The writ petition stands disposed of with observation as indicated above.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U