Neha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 14588 of 2022 ====================================================== Neha Kumari Wife of Suman Kumar and daughter of Mokhtar Saw, Resident of Village-Matihani, P.O.-Matihani, P.S.-Matihani, District-Begusarai at present posted as A.N.M. Health Sub Center, Barhara, Block-Raniganj, District-Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Director in Chief, Health Service, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Deputy Director, Health, Purnea Division. 4.

The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Araria. 5.

The In Charge Medical Officer, Primary Health Center, Block-Raniganj, District-Aararia.

6.

The In Charge Medical Officer, Health Sub Center, Barhara, BlockRaniganj, District-Aararia. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Kundan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr Rajeshwar Singh, GA X ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 02-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents through Virtual Mode.

The petitioner's grievance is non-consideration of her claim for posting her under the State Government's decision at a place in proximity with her husband who is also serving in the Department of Health. A copy of petitioner's representation is Annexure 9 to the writ petition and the petitioner's counsel submits that the same is not being considered by Respondent No

Patna High Court CWJC No.14588 of 2022(2) dt.02-12-2022 2/2 2.

In view of the limited nature of grievance, this writ petition need not be kept pending as decision has to be taken by Respondent No 2.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim, this Court would observe that Respondent No 2 is under a legal obligation to pass an order in accordance with law for which this Court would direct that the same be done within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

Learned State Counsel also has no objection in disposal of the writ petition in the above terms. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) M.E.H./- U