Shrimati Hiramani Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1224 of 2017 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2241 of 2014 =========================================================== Shrimati Hiramani Kumari, Wife of Kopendra Kumar, Resident of Village- Jhari Bigha, Gram Panchayat Chamandi, Post Office- Pondil, Police Station- Kurtha, District- Arwal.
.... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.
3. The Deputy Director, Welfare, Magadh Division at Gaya.
4. The District Magistrate, Arwal.
5. The District Programme Officer, Arwal.
6. The C.D.P.O., Sonbhadra, Banshi, Surajpur, District - Arwal.
7. Renu Kumari, Wife of Simant Kumar Guddu, Resident of Village- Govindpur, Post Office- Majhiyawa, District- Arwal presently working in the office of Sonbhadra Banshi Surajpur, Arwal.
.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Uday Narayan Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. KAUSHAL KR JHA-AAG8 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 18-06-2018 Since the engagement as an Anganwari Sevika is not a permanent appointment under the State but a contractual engagement with the object of providing nutritious food to malnourished children. If the object and purpose for which engagement of the present
Patna High Court LPA No.1224 of 2017 dt.18-06-2018 2/2 appellant was not being achieved as is evident from inspection and inquiry, after giving suitable opportunity to the appellant by the authorities concerned. The explanation was not found satisfactory which could exonerate the appellant of wrong doings as well as shortcomings found in the implementation of the policy. Since enough opportunity of judicial review has been provided to the appellant before the various authorities including the learned Single Judge, we are not inclined to interfere with the order. In view of the findings emerging from the impugned order dated 21.07.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge, we are of the opinion that it does not suffer from any infirmity, which requires rectification.
Writ has no merit. It is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Devendra/Arjun AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date21.06.2018 Transmission Date NA