Kaleema Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6943 of 2016 =========================================================== Kaleema Khatoon, wife of Sri Asdullah Galiv, Resident of Village + P.O.- Majhariya, P.S.- Adapur, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The Director, I.C.D.S. Bihar (Old Secretariat, Patna).

3. The Deputy Director, Welfare, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

4. The District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari.

5. The District Programme Officer (I.C.D.S.), East Champaran at Motihari.

6. The Child Development Officer (C.D.P.O.), Adapur, East Champaran.

7. Janaki Kumari, W/o Sri Yado Lal Paswan, R/o Village- Majhariya, P.S.- Adapur, District- East Champaran.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Ms. Bandana Singh, AC to GP-18 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 19-06-2018 Heard Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the District Programme Officer, East Champaran at Motihari dated 28.10.2015 impugned at Annexure 6, whereby her claim for appointment as Anganbari Sevika has been rejected, inter alia, on grounds of disqualification incurred by the petitioner by reason of appointment of her husband as Panchayat Teacher.

The facts recorded by the District Programme Officer, East Champaran at Motihari confirm that the husband of the petitioner

Patna High Court CWJC No.6943 of 2016 dt.19-06-2018 was drawing Rs.9,300/- as Panchayat Teacher when the matter came up for consideration before the Aam Sabha and although Mr. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has tried to dispute this position but there is nothing on record to dislodge the opinion. The claim of the petitioner for appointment as Anganbari Sevika was considered and rejected by the Aam Sabha on grounds that the husband of the petitioner was drawing Rs.9,300/- which is in tune with the guidelines. I thus find no reason to interfere with the decision of the District Programme Officer, East Champaran at Motihari.

The writ petition is dismissed.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 23-06-2018 Transmission Date NA