← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/18494/2019dismissed

Nitu Kumari @ Nitu Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-20Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18494 of 2019 ====================================================== Nitu Kumari @ Nitu Devi Wife of Pankaj Kumar Singh Resident of VillageGangauli, P.O. and P.S. Mashrakh, Block Mashrakh, District-Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Commissioner, Saran at Chapra. 2.

District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.

3.

District Programme Officer, Saran at Chapra, 4.

The Child Development Project Officer, Mashrakh, District-Saran at Chapra. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kr Singh No.1 For the Respondent/s :

Mr.S. K. Mandal ( SC-3) Mr. Arujun Prasad, AC to SC-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-09-2019 It is the petitioner's claim that she was selected as Aaganbari Sevika in the year 2010, which fact was communicated to her through letter dated 08.03.2010 (Annexure-1). In terms of the said letter, the petitioner was required to be sent for training. She was, however, never sent for any training nor she was allowed to join as Aangabari Sevika of Aaganbari Kendra No. 128 in village Gangauli, Tola Bichala in the District of Saran.

2. From the pleadings, it appears that fresh selection process has been initiated in the year 2018 for selection of Aanganbari Sevika for the Centre in question. The petitioner has no explanation in the writ application for approaching this

Patna High Court CWJC No.18494 of 2019(2) dt.20-09-2019 2/2 Court more than nine years after her selection in 2010. She is said to have filed an appeal before the District Magistrate, Saran, giving rise to Appeal Case No. 08 of 2018 against the selection process initiated in the year 2018.

3. In the background of above noted fact, I am not inclined to entertain this writ application, which has been filed seeking direction to send the petitioner for training on the basis of her selection said to have been made in the year 2010.

4. This application is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) arun/- U