High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Anita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 23 June, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Anita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 23 June, 2011
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                           CWJC No.263 of 2011
                  ANITA KUMARI W/O BIJENDRA KUMAR @ BIJENDRA KUMAR
                  KUSHWAHA, R/O VILL.-SHEKHMAHAMADPUR PS-KHUSHRUPUR
                  Distt- PATNA-------------------------PETITIONER
                                  Versus
                  1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
                  2. THE COLLECTOR, DISTT- PATNA
                  3. DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER,PATNA
                  4. CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, KHUSHRUPUR,PATNA
                  5. THE MUKHIYA, HARDASH BIGHA GRAM PANCHAYAT, PS- & PS-
                     KHUSHRUPUR, DISTT- PATNA
                  6. PANCHAYAT SECY. GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ HARDASH BIGHA, PATNA
                  7. REENA DEVI, W/O AJIT KUMAR R/O VILLAGE-
                   SHEIKHMAHAMADPUR, PS.KHUSHRUPUR, DISTT-PATNA------
                   ------------------------------------RESPONDENTS
                               -----------

2 23.6.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

With much hue and cry allegation was made by the

petitioner that in the selection of Anganbari Sevika she was

intentionally ousted by not accepting her application by CDPO.

In the counter affidavit there is categorical

statement that the petitioner had never made any application and,

in fact, she was not an applicant for the selection in question

which was held in between 8.4.2010 to 15.4.2010 because the

petitioner was too busy in preparation of her marriage which was

solemnized on 16.4.2010. There was no occasion for her to opt

for the post of Anganbari Sevika. It is evident that frivolous

allegations have been made against C.D.P.O. with complaints

being addressed to many a persons including the Chief Minister.

There is assertion in the counter affidavit that the

matter was looked into and enquired but none of the allegations

were found to be true. Obviously if this is the position, then it is a

motivated kind of complaint which was carried out by the

petitioner and the petitioner has intentionally and deliberately
-2-

misled or suppressed the facts to this extent. There is no rebuttal of

the statement as well as the annexures which have been brought on

record by way of counter affidavit.

Such kind of motivated application ought to be

discouraged

This writ application is dismissed with a cost of

Rs. 1000/- to be deposited by the petitioner to the Legal Aid

Committee, Patna High Court, Patna within a period of eight

weeks.

RPS                  (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)