Petitioner challenged the CDPO's decision to reject her appointment as Aanganbari Sevika and call for a fresh selection via Aam Sabha. The High Court found the decision rational and dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.4300 of 2015
Parinta Devi ..... Petitioner
Versus
Pratappur, District Chatra.
…. Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA
For the Petitioner : Mr. Arbind Kumar, Advocate Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : J.C. to S.C.III
3/16.08.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent State.
-2-
(H. C. Mishra, J)
R.Kumar
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the decision to reject the petitioner's appointment and select a new candidate through a fresh Aam Sabha.
Whether the question of filling the Aanganbari Sevika post requires judicial intervention.
Parinta Devi
The State of Jharkhand
Deputy Commissioner, Chatra
Deputy Development Commissioner, Chatra
Child Development Project Officer, Pratappur, District Chatra
H.C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
