Rinki Kumari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14521 of 2013 =========================================================== Rinki Kumari Wife of Dinesh Prasad, resident of village- Gahiri, P.S.- Nautan, District - West Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah

3. The District Welfare Officer-cum-District Programme Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah

4. The Child Development Project Officer, Nautan, P.S. - Nautan, District - West Champaran

5. Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Gahiri, Block - Nautan, District - West Champaran.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4 Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to AAG-4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-11-2016 In the present case, a limited and short prayer has been made that the selection process for Anganwari Sevika at Centre No. 141 within the Gram Panchayat Raj, Gahiri, Block-Nautan, District-West Champaran, was initiated, it is in the mid-way and has not been completed.

As per the claim of the petitioner, an advertisement was published for appointment of Anganwari Sevika in Hindi Daily Newspaper. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner and others applied for that post. The Aam Sabha was convened on 16.02.2011. In pursuance

Patna High Court CWJC No.14521 of 2013 dt.10-11-2016 2/2 thereof, merit list relating to Centre No. 141 was prepared. The name of the petitioner is appearing at the top, but the selection process could not be completed, as an objection was raised with respect to the mapping done in connection with the selection. It has been said that still the seat of Anganwari Sevika is vacant, the process of selection has not been completed.

In such view of the matter, the authority must dispose of the objection, if any and complete the process of selection if already not completed. This Court is not giving any opinion on the merit of the case.

With the above observation/direction, this petition is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 15/11/2016 Transmission Date