Anita Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.285 of 2014 In LPA 1017 of 2013 ====================================================== Anita Sinha .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kameshwar Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Avinash Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ) 21-07-2016 Heard Mr. Kameshwar Kumar, learned Counsel for the appellant-petitioner, and Mr. Avinash Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents-State.

This application seeks review of the direction given by the order, dated 15.05.2014, passed in L.P.A No. 1017 of 2013, which arose out of C.W.J.C. No. 3757 of 2013. The material facts, having been made explicit in the order, under review, are reproduced below:- "In view of letter no. 8088 dated 5.10.2013 of the Incharge Officer, Public Grievance Cell, addressed to the District Magistrate, Nalanda after enquiry holding that the lady Supervisor never made any enquiry on the spot and which was the foundation for action against the appellants wrongly affirmed by the Programme Officer, the order of termination of the appellant as Anganwari Sevika at Village Bhobhi (West), Centre No. 59, District Nalanda becomes unsustainable. The appellant is held entitled to reinstatement.

Public powers given for a public purpose has to be used for public good. Anganwari Sevikas, appointed for dissemination of welfare scheme, may be answerable for dereliction of duties. But

Patna High Court C. REV. No.285 of 2014 (6) dt.21-07-2016 2/2 when the power given to a public functionary to ensure discharge of duties by an Anganwari Sevika is abused, the person exercising the power becomes personally answerable. Power inheres in the chair and not the individual.

The Government is not answerable in the present case. The answerability lies individually with the Lady Supervisor concerned and the District Programme officer. The appellant is held entitled to full honorarium for the period that she was wrongly kept away from discharge of duties as Anganwari Sevika. It shall be paid to the appellant by the State Government immediately and recovered from the concerned after due opportunity. The State Government will also examine the feasibility and need for departmental proceeding against the concerned who in an enquiry by the authorities themselves have been held to have abused their powers.

The order under appeal dated 3.7.2013 and the orders for removal of the appellant are held to be unsustainable. They are all set aside."

In view of the fact that the review petitioner has not been able to show any infirmity, legal or factual, in the order, which is sought to be reviewed, we do not find that the order, in question, calls for any review.

In view of the above and in the interest of justice, this review application is dismissed.

(I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Anjana Mishra, J) sunil/- U