Archana Anand v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.47 of 2025 ====================================================== Archana Anand W/o Rajiv Kumar, R/o Village-Gorigaman, P.S.-Mahua, District-Vaishali, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, District-Vaishali at Hajipur. 4.

The Director, Integrated Child Development Services, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The District Programme Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur, District-Vaishali at Hajipur.

6.

The Child Development Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur, District-Vaishali at Hajipur.

7.

Kanchan Kumari D/o unknown, R/o unknown.

8.

The Child Development Project Officer, Mahua, Vaishali, Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Mujtabaul Haque (GP-12) Mr. Manish Kumar (AC to GP-12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Re:- I.A. No. 1 of 2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this interlocutory application has been filed for deleting the name of 'Kalpana Kumari' as respondent no.7 in the soft copy and hard

2/6 copy of the present writ petition and thereafter, implead/add 'Kanchan Kumari' as Respondent no.7 and 'The Child Development Project Officer, Mahua, Vaishali as Respondent no.8.

2. Learned counsel for the State has no objection for the same.

3. As such, I.A. No. 1 of 2026 stands allowed.

4. Registry is directed to delete the name of 'Kalpana Kumari' as respondent no.7 in the soft copy and hard copy of the present writ petition and thereafter add 'Kanchan Kumari' as respondent no.7 and 'The Child Development Project Officer, Mahua, Vaishali, Bihar' as respondent no.8, both in the soft copy and hard copy of the present writ petition, the details of which, are mentioned in para 1 of I.A. No. 1 of 2026. Re:- C.W.J.C. No. 47 of 2025 The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief/s:- "A. For issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondents to produce the letter(s), order(s), etc whereby and whereunder the appointment of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika(s) for Vishnupur Hiraram Panchayat, Mahua,

3/6 District- Vaishali has been done without following proper procedure in violation of letter dated 11.02.2023 bearing memo no. 58.

B. For quashing the letter(s), order(s), etc so produced, whereby and whereunder the appointment of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika(s) for Vishnupur Hiraram Panchayat, Mahua, District- Vaishali has been done without following proper procedure in violation of letter dated 11.02.2023 bearing memo no. 58.

C. For issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondents to conduct fresh appointment of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika(s).

D. For passing such further or other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a candidate for selection for the post of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika for Anganwadi Kendra No. 319, Ward No. 10 of Gram Panchayat- Vishnupur Hiraram, P.S.-Mahua and District- Vaishali. Counsel submits that an advertisement was published in January, 2018 for the selection of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika for 69 Anganwadi centres. However, the same was stayed vide order dated 15.03.2018 in C.W.J.C. No. 3807 of 2018. Subsequently, the stay was revoked vide order dated

4/6 10.03.2022. Counsel submits that the Child Development Project Officer, Mahua (Vaishali) vide letter No. 158 dated 14.03.2022 sought guidance from the District Program Officer, Vaishali regarding the process of appointment of these Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika. Counsel submits that the D.P.O, Vaishali vide Letter No. 605 dated 26.03.2022 further wrote to the Director, I.C.D.S., Patna, Bihar seeking his guidance that whether such selection shall be made pursuant to the previously issued advertisement of 2018 according to guidelines of 2016 or shall be made by floating new advertisement governed by the selection guidelines of 2019. Counsel submits that the Director, I.C.D.S. directed that the selection process shall be as per the advertisement issued in 2018 which shall be governed by the selection guidelines of 2016.

Counsel submits that the selection of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika could not be made in-spite of two meetings on two occasions. He submits that a representation has been made that in case, selection could not be completed on two different meetings, then fresh advertisement has to be made. Counsel further submits that in this regard, representation was made, but nothing happened and selection was continued in which, respondent no.7 was selected. Counsel submits that vide order dated 19.02.

5/6 directed the petitioner to file an application for adding the selected candidate namely, Kanchan Kumari as also the Child Development Project Officer, Mahua, Vaishali as party respondents in the instant application.

3. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the Director, I.C.D.S has written a letter to the D.P.O contained in Memo No. 3364 dated 26.06.2023 that there is no provision of holding special Aam Sabha. But, selection for Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika has not been stopped. Counsel submits that in continuance of the guideline, the selection was completed in which, one Kanchan Kumari has been selected.

4. In the light of the pleadings and the materials on record, it transpires to this Court that the petitioner is aggrieved by the selection process, but in-spite of his objection and pendency of the writ petition, selection process was completed. If, petitioner is interested to challenge the selection of the person concerned, then he has only remedy is to challenge the appointment of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika before the D.P.O. in accordance with law.

5. As such, the present writ petition stands disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the selection of respondent no.7 by filing the application before the concerned

6/6 D.P.O, within 30 days from today. The Respondent no.5 shall pass order after hearing the petitioner as well as the selected candidate (respondent no.7) within 90 days thereafter. The said 90 days shall be counted from the date of appearance of all concerned.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U