Nitu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2661 of 2024 ====================================================== Nitu Kumari S/o Late Deepak Kumar Pandey, R/o Village Naseera, PSDaudpur, District Saran at Chhapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra. 2.

District Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra.

3.

District Program Officer, Saran.

4.

Child Development Project Officer, Manjhi, Saran. 5.

Anita Devi, W/o Binay Kumar Pandey, R/o Village-Naseera, PS-Daudpur, District-Saran at Chhapra.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baidya Nath Thakur, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Rajeshwar Singh (GA-10) Mr.Jitendra Kumar, AC to GA-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 07-03-2024

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1(i) For settingaside the order dated 21.08.2023 passed by the District Magistrate, Saran at Chhapra in Anganwari Appeal Case No. 01/2022 whereby the same was dismissed observing that the order of the First Appellate Authority-cum- District Program Officer, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Saran dated 03. 12.2019 passed in Anganwari Case No. 12/2019 holding the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sevika in Anganwari Kendra no. 315 of village Naseera, ward no. 7, ps-Daudpur, Manjhi, district-Saran

Patna High Court CWJC No.2661 of 2024(2) dt.07-03-2024 2/2 on 10.08.2019as illegal, needed no interference. Further, a writ of Mandamus be issued:- (ii) For direction to the Child Development Program Officer, Saran to appoint the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sevika inAnganwari Kendra no. 315 of village Naseera, ward no. 7, ps- Daudpur, Manjhi, district-Saran with effect from 03.12.2019 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 civil suit before the learned Civil Court having competent jurisdiction, for redressal of her aforesaid grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.

3. The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U