Kumari Poonam Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14614 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. Kumari Poonam Sinha W/o Awadhesh Prasad Resident of Village Gouchhi Chak, P.O. Rasisa, Block AND Police Station Ekangarsarai, District Nalanda. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director, ICDS, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division at Patna

4. The Deputy Director, Welfare, Patna Division, Patna

5. The District Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif

6. The District Programme Officer, Nalanda at Biharsharif

7. The Child Development Project Ofifcer, Ekangarsaria, District Nalanda

8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Jamuawa, Block Ekangarsarai, District Nalanda .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. GA-8 Sandeep Kumar =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-03-2015 Since the programme is meant for the poorest of poor as well as meant for malnourished children and expectant mothers, who are going to form the future able bodied citizens of this country and if objective, for which the petitioner was hired, is not being achieved as is apparent from the explanation and the hearing which was held with regard to her conduct and behaviour, the least which was required to be done has been done. This Court will not sit in appeal over and above the findings of the statutory authorities saddled with the responsibility and come to a different conclusion in absence of

Patna High Court CWJC No.14614 of 2014 dt.20-03-2015 2/2 any other cogent material.

Writ application is dismissed as this Court does not find that anything in violation of principles of natural justice or without providing opportunity of hearing was done. That is the only opening for the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in such matters especially since petitioner is only an agent as an Anganbari Sevika.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) sk U