Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1262 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8488 of 2016 ====================================================== Sunita Devi Wife of Chand Mundrika Singh, Resident of village- Ubhwa, Saroja, P.S.- Panapur, District- Saran ... Appellant

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Collector, Saran.

3.

District Programme Officer, Saran.

4.

C.D.P.O., Block Pananpur, District- Saran.

5.

Daizy Devi, Wife of Deo Narain Singh, Resident of village- Ubhwa, Saroja, P.S.- Panapur, District- Saran.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant :

Mr. Arun Kr.Prasad, Advocate and Mr. Kapil Deo Singh, Advocate For the Respondents :

Mr.Gyan Prakash Ojha -GA7 Mr. Abhishek Singh, AC to GA 7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) 20-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel appearing for respondents no.1 to 4. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 6.8.2018, passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No. 8488 of 2016, by which and whereunder he dismissed the above state writ petition filed by the appellant taking note of this fact that the appellant challenged the appointment of 2010 after a lapse of six years.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.1262 of 2018(16) dt.20-01-2020 2/2 The appellant applied for Angnbari Sevika but her claim was turned down and respondent no.5 was appointed on the post of Anganwari Sevika. The appellant challenged the aforesaid appointment of respondent no.5 on the ground that she produced forged documents at the time of her appointment and on the basis of the aforesaid forged documents her appointment was made.

We do not think it proper to interfere into the impugned order passed by the leaned Single Judge because the learned Single Judge has rightly observed that the appellant has come for disturbing the appointment which was made in the year 2010, and accordingly, this appeal stands dismissed. However, the appellant may take legal recourse before appropriate bench in accordance with law and rules. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U