Patna High CourtCWJC/14295/2010dismissed

Indu Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-05-14Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14295 of 2010 ====================================================== Indu Devi, aged about 37 years, wife of Shri Vijay Kant Yadav, resident of village- Anapatti, P.O.- Sirauli, P.S.- Ashok Paper Mill, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna

2. Secretary, Department of Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. Director, ICDS, Bihar, Patna

4. The Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga

5. The District Magistrate, Darbhanga

6. The Incharge Deputy Collector, District Public Grievance Cell, Darbhanga

7. Block Development Officer-Cum-Child Development Project Officer Hayaghat, Darbhanga

8. Nikhat Tabassum, Mukhia, Singhauli Gram Panchayat under Hayaghat Block, District- Darbhanga

9. Raj Kumar Matho, Panchayat Secretary, Singhauli Gram Panchayat under Hayaghat Block, Darbhanga

10. Sunita Devi, W/O Raj Kumar Yadav, R/O Vill.- Anpatti, P.O. Sirauli, P.S. Ashok Paper Mill, Distt.- Darbhanga ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aditya Prakash Sahay, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, A.C. to G.P.-11 For Respondent No.10. :

Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-05-2018 It is the third day consecutively no one is from the side of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondent no.10 are present.

This matter relates to appointment of Anganbari Sevika. From the counter affidavit, it appears that Sunita Devi, respondent no.10, has been selected and appointed as Anganbari

Patna High Court CWJC No.14295 of 2010(9) dt.14-05-2018 2/2 Sevika as she has better marks than to the present petitioner. Nothing wrong has been done by the respondents in appointing Sunita Devi, respondent no.10, as she has better marks than to the petitioner. Hence, this Court does not find any merit in this writ petition.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. (Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- U