Patna High CourtCWJC/4827/2018disposed

Anita Rai v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-06-27Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4827 of 2018 ====================================================== Anita Rai, wife of Rajeshwar Prasad, Resident of Ward No. 3, Village- Pila Chak, P.O.+ P.S.- Dulhin Bazar, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, ICDS, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Patna.

5. The District Welfare Officer, Patna.

6. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Welfare, Patna.

7. The Child Development Project Officer, Dulhin Bazar Block, Patna.

8. The Block Project Manager, Jeevika, Dulhin Bazar, Patna.

9. Amrita Bharti, wife of Pankaj Kumar, Resident of Ward No. 3, Village- Pila Chak, P.O.+ P.S.- Dulhin Bazar, District- Patna. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha -GA-7 Mr. Abhishek Singh, A.C. to G.A.-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 27-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

This matter relates to selection of Anganbari Sevika of centre no.136 in village-Pilachak in the district of Patna. The petitioner is challenging the appointment of private respondent no.9, claiming that she has wrongly been appointed as Anganbari Sevika.

Under the guidelines, the alternative forum has been provided in the event the person is feeling that he/she has

Patna High Court CWJC No.4827 of 2018 dt.27-06-2018 2/2 wrongly been treated and others have wrongly been appointed, would make complaint before the forum provided in the guidelines. However, the petitioner without exhausting the alternative remedy, has directly approached this Court. In such view of the matter, the petitioner, if so advised, may exhaust the alternative remedy by way of filing complaint before the District Programme Officer, who is the competent person to consider the complaint made by the candidate in connection with selection of Anganbari Sevika. The petitioner may take the plea which has been taken in this writ petition. If such a complaint is filed by the petitioner, the District Programme Officer, will consider and disposed of the same within a period of six months from the date of filing of the complaint.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N/A.

Uploading Date 29.06.2018 Transmission Date N/A.