Sulekha Kumari, v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21278 of 2021 ====================================================== Sulekha Kumari, Wife of Akhilesh Kumar, resident of Village-Kaila, P.O.- Kaila, Asthawan, District-Nalanda, Pin Code-803107. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna.
2.
Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna. 3.
Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Bihar, Patna. 4.
Deputy Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Bihar, Patna. 5.
Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.
6.
District Magistrate, Nalanda.
7.
District Programme Officer, Nalanda.
8.
Child Development Project Officer, Asthawan, District-Nalanda. 9.
Anju Kumari, wife of Shri Roshan Kumar, resident of Village-Kaila, Ward No.-6, P.S.-Sare, District-Nalanda, Pin Code-803107. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Abhinav Srivastava, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Md. Raisul Haque ( SC-10 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 03-04-2024
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1.(i) Issuance of a direction, order or writ, including writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29/11/2019 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 113/2019 by the Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna, by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 17/04/2015 passed in Aanganbari Case No. 109/2014 by the Deputy Director, Welfare, Patna Division, Patna, has been rejected;
Patna High Court CWJC No.21278 of 2021(2) dt.03-04-2024 2/3 (ii) Issuance of a direction, order or writ, including writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 17/04/2015 passed in Aanganbari Case No. 109/2014 by the Deputy Director, Welfare, Patna Division, Patna, by which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 05/08/2014 bearing memo no. 1613 passed by the District Programme Officer, Nalanda has been rejected; (iii) Issuance of a direction, order or writ, including writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 05/08/2014 bearing memo no. 1613 issued by the District Programme Officer, Nalanda, by which the appointment of the petitioner against the post of Aanganbari Sevika at Aanganbari Center under Gram Panchayat Raj Kaila, Code No. 53 in the district of Nalanda has been cancelled and in her place, directions were issued to appoint respondent no. 9 in the said capacity at the Aanganbari Center, in question;
(iv) Issuance of a direction, order or writ, including writ in the nature of commanding the concerned respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to resume her duties in the capacity of Aanganbari Sevika at Aanganbari Center under Gram Panchayat Raj Kaila, Code No. 53 in the district of Nalanda along with all the consequential benefits;
(v) Issuance of a declaration holding that the provisions contained under the amended guidelines for selection of Aanganbari Sevika/Sahayika as contained in a letter dated 10/06/2013 issued from
Patna High Court CWJC No.21278 of 2021(2) dt.03-04-2024 3/3 the Directorate of Integrated Child Development Scheme would not apply in the matter of selection of the petitioner and respondent no. 9 in view of the fact that prior the aforesaid amendments having been notified, the petitioner had already been appointed on 06/02/2013 in the capacity of Aanganbari Sevika at Aanganbari Center under Gram Panchayat Raj Kaila, Code No. 53 in the district of Nalanda."
2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law, including that of filing a suit before the learned Civil Court having competent jurisdiction for redressal of her aforesaid grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.
3. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) sonal/- U