Pooja Sonwani v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 3233 OF 2018 Pooja Sonwani W/o Tejram Sonwani, Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Chaura, Block Rajpur, Civil And Revenue District Balrampur, Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Woman And Child Development, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Khand, Raipur (C.G.) 2.

The Collector, District Balrampur, Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3.

The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Raipur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4.

Project Officer, Integrated Child Development, Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 5.

Smt. Ritu Singh, W/o Kaila Ram, Aged About 28 Years R/o Chaura, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (C.G.) 6.

Smt. Sumitra, W/o Bhimsen, Presently Resided At Badkagaon, Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 23/04/2018 1.

Challenge to the present writ petition is to the order of Collector, Balrampur-Ramanujganj, dated 7.2.2018.

2.

Grievance of the Petitioner is that the Respondent No.6 has been granted appointment as Mini Anganwadi Worker in violation to the terms and conditions of the circulars and guidelines of the State Government. 3.

From the perusal of records and rule position, it reflects that the order under challenge in the present case is an order which is revisable by preferring a revision before the Revisional Authority.

4.

In view of the fact that an alternative statutory remedy is available to the Petitioner, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition in its present form and reserving the right of the Petitioner to prefer a revision against the impugned order before the Revisional Authority, the writ petition itself is disposed of.

5.

In the event of a revision being preferred by the Petitioner, the Revisional Authority is expected to decide the same as expeditiously as possible in accordance with the rules and guidelines, after hearing both the parties.

6.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion so far as the merits of the case is concerned.

7.

With the aforesaid direction/observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ Judge