Patna High CourtL.P.A/374/2017dismissed

Nutan Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-04-13Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.374 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.609 of 2015 ====================================================== Nutan Kumari, W/o Sri Rajesh Kumar, R/o Village Sorhipur, P.S. Warsaliganj, District Nawada.

... ... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of B;ihar at Patna.

2. Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar at Patna.

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

4. Deputy Director, Welfare, Magadh Division, Gaya at Gaya.

5. The District Magistrate, Nawada at Nawada.

6. The District Programme Officer, Nawada.

7. The C.D.P.O., Warsaliganj Block, Warsaliganj.

8. Mukhiya Kochgaon Panchayat, Kochagaon, Warsaliganj.

9. Pratima Kumari, W/o Nand Kishore Kumar, R/o Village Sorhipur, P.S. Warsaliganj, District Nawada.

10. Suruchi Kumari, W/o Gaurav Kumar, R/o Village Sothipur, P.S. Warsaliganj, District Nawada.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) 13-04-2018 Heard counsel for the appellant.

Learned single Judge has committed no error by dismissing the writ application vide order dated 27.01.2017 for the reasons that the vacancy caused due to removal of the Anganbari Sevika in the first round of selection was followed by yet another selection in which this appellant did not participate nor did she challenge the order of the District Magistrate to hold a fresh selection process.

Patna High Court LPA No.374 of 2017(10) dt.13-04-2018 2/2 It is too late in the day now to argue since she was at Sl. No. 2 in the first round of selection and on removal of the candidate at Sl. No. 1 she gets a right automatically to be appointed.

We do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned single Judge. There is no right of this appellant to be appointed.

Appeal is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Nilu Agrawal, J) Pawan/- U