Vibha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.952 of 2015 =========================================================== Vibha Kumari. Wife of Anil Kumar Akela. Resident of village - Berma, (Koriya Patti), P.O.- Barma, Block - Lakhnaur, District - Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Commissioner , Darbhanga.

3. The District Magistrate, Madhubani.

4. The District Welfare and Programme Officer, Madhubani.

5. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Jhanjharpur, District - Madhubani.

6. The Block Development Officer, Lakhnour, District - Madhubani.

7. The Child Development Project Officer, Lakhnour, District - Madhubani.

8. Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchayat - Berma, Block - Lakhnour, District - Madhubani.

9. Ram Prasad Mukhiya of Berma Panchayat. Resident of village - Berma, P.O.- Barma, Block - Lakhnaur, District - Madhubani. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Narayan Mahto For the Respondent/s : AC to AAG - 9 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 20-02-2017 Heard Sri Ram Narayan Mahto, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to AAG No. 9.

The petitioner, invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for directing the respondents to issue joining / appointment letter to the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sewika in Centre No. 76 , Ward No. 1 and 2 Panchayat Berma , Block -Lakhnaur , District -Madhubani. A plea has been taken that Aam Sabha held on 19.7.2010 decided to appoint the petitioner as Anganwari Sewika. It has been

Patna High Court CWJC No.952 of 2015 dt.20-02-2017 2/2 indicated in paragraph no. 1 of the writ petition itself that in Aam Sabha the C.D.P.O. /respondent no. 7 had not participated. Meaning thereby that without completion of quorum the selection process was earlier initiated in the year 2010. However, in this case a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 4, 6 and 7 and a specific stand has been taken that earlier selection process was subsequently cancelled on the ground of several irregularities and thereafter, in the year 2014 applications were invited even for the Anganwari Centre No. 76. Pursuant to the advertisement the petitioner also applied and in the final merit list petitioner's name had appeared at serial no. 09 whereas, one Rekha Kumari was placed at serial no. 1 and selection process in view of the advertisement of 2014 has already been concluded.

In view of the fact that after 2010 Aam Sabha the decision was subsequently taken for cancelling earlier selection process and fresh selection process has already been concluded, there is no reason to entertain the present petition.

The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 21-02-2017 Transmission Date NA