Kumari Sanju v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18482 of 2022 ====================================================== Kumari Sanju W/o Shivendra Kumar Resident of Village and Post-Piprahi, Ward No. 03, P.S.-Piprahi, District-Sheohar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Additional Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Director, Integrated Child Development Service (ICDS), Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna.

5.

The District Magistrate, Sheohar.

6.

The District Programme Officer (ICDS), Sheohar. 7.

The Child Development Project Officer, Piprahi, Sheohar. 8.

Smt. Rekha Kumari W/o Ajeet Kushwaha, Resident of Village-Post-Piprahi, P.S.-Piprahi, District-Sheohar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Suman Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Md. Raisul Haque ( SC- 10 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 23-04-2024 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "1.(i) Issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing thereunder the order dated 08.11.2022 passed by the District Programme Officer, ICDS, Sheohar (Respondent No.6) in Anganwadi Case No.11/2020 whereunder selection of the writ petitioner on the post of Anganwadi Sevika was cancelled.

(ii). Further issuance of a writ in the

Patna High Court CWJC No.18482 of 2022(2) dt.23-04-2024 2/2 nature of Mandamus commanding the concerned/ competent Respondent State Authority/Authorities to reinstate the petitioner in the service on the post of Anganwadi Sevika under Centre No.121, Ward No.03 within Mesaudha Gram Panchayat in the district of Sheohar with effect from the date of Selection/engagement, i.e.

25.02.2019 with all consequential benefits."

2.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law, including that of filing a suit before the Ld. Civil Court having competent jurisdiction, for redressal of the aforesaid grievances. Liberty, so sought, is granted.

3.

The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U