High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Sunita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 August, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Sunita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 August, 2011
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                     CWJC No.8447 of 2011
                  Sunita Kumari, wife of Kamdeo Rajak, resident of village - Mahisona,
                  Gram Panchayat - Mahisona, P S - Lakhisarai, District - Lakhisarai
                                                  Versus
                  1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Lakhisarai.
                  2. The Collector, Lakhisarai.
                  3. The District Programme Officer, Lakhisarai.
                  4. The District Welfare Officer, Lakhisarai.
                  5. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Lakhisarai.
                  6. The Block Development Officer, Lakhisarai.
                  7. The Child Development Project Officer, Lakhisarai.
                  8. The Panchayat Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Mahisona, P S and District
                     - Lakhisarai.
                                             -----------

02. 18.8.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the State.

Claim of the petitioner is that she was initially

selected by the Gram Sabha on 22.8.2008 on the post of

Anganbari Sewika but appointment letter has not been issued till

date nor she has been allowed to work in that capacity. Repeated

requests to the authorities have not begotten any relief to her and

therefore, the writ application.

The matter requires to be examined and verified at

the local level. Petitioner has already filed application before the

District Magistrate, Lakhisarai on 20th January, 2011 in terms of

Annexure-7.

Since the District Magistrate also happens to be the

appellate authority in the scheme of things for such

appointment, let the matter be considered by the District

Magistrate within three months from the date of production /

communication of a copy of this order. Petitioner also has
2

freedom to file yet another application, if so advised, in case

annexure-7 is not available with the respondents since there is

no proof of filing of such an application.

Writ stands disposed of with above direction.

rkp                                            ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)