Seema Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17955 of 2010 ====================================================== Seema Kumari W/O Sri Mohan Sah R/O Vill Bharwari (Chandauli), P.S.Belsand, Distt-Sitamarhi(Bihar) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Welfare Department Govt. Of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director, I.C.D.S., Social Welfare Department Govt. Of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate Sitamarhi

4. The District Program Officer Sitamarhi

5. The Child Development Project Officer(C.D.P.O.) Belsand, Sitamarhi

6. Smt. Raj Kumari Devi, The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Mahathi @Chandauli, P.S. Belsand, Distt-Sitamarhi

7. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Mahathi @Chandauli, P.S. Belsand, Distt-Sitamarhi

8. Sunita Kumari W/O Sri Kishori Sah R/O Vill Bharwari(Chandauli), P.S.Belsand, Distt-Sitamarhi .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tejendra Sinha For the Respondent no.8: Mr. Binod Pd. Singh For the State : Mr. Neeraj Raj AC to GA 8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 21-06-2018 The present petition has been filed challenging the appointment of the respondent no. 8 on the post of Anganwari Sevika at Anganwari Centre no. 66, ward no.-3, vill-Bharwari under the Gram panchayat Raj Chandauli, Block-Belsand, DistSaharsa on the ground that the petitioner is having a better qualification than the respondent no. 8.

The short facts of the case are that an advertisement was issued for the purposes of making appointment

Patna High Court CWJC No.17955 of 2010 (3) dt.21-06-2018 2/3 on the post of Anganwari Sevika at Anganwari Centre no. 66, ward no.-3, vill-Bharwari under the Gram panchayat Raj Chandauli, Block-Belsand, Dist-Saharsa. After the selection process, merit list was published and the respondent no. 8 was appointed on the post of Anganwari Sevika.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the appointment of petitioner on the ground that she is having a better qualification than the respondent no. 8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents have submitted that as per the guidelines of the year 2010 issued by the State Government for appointment on the post of Anganwari Sevika, the basic qualification required is matriculation and the respondent no. 8 has got more marks in matriculation examination than the petitioner herein, hence there is no irregularity in the selection of the respondent no. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the respondent no. 8 possesses basic eligibility qualification for appointment on the post of Anganwari Sevika and infact, has got more marks in the matriculation examination than the petitioner herein. I further find from the materials on record that the petitioner has directly come to this Court without availing the alternate remedy of appeal before the concerned authority and on

Patna High Court CWJC No.17955 of 2010 (3) dt.21-06-2018 3/3 this ground as well, the present writ petition is fit to be dismissed. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the present writ petition is dismissed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U