Disposed¶20

Punam Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC23 Sept 2024WPC/7560/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anganbari Sewika selection objection; Gamharia Anganbari Centre; Mundro Panchayat; Giridih; writ disposed without counter affidavit; direction to Deputy Commissioner Giridih to treat writ as representation; reasoned and speaking order; 16 weeks timeline; W.P. (S) Jharkhand High Court 2024; Deepak Roshan, J.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 (Deputy Commissioner, Giridih) to treat the writ application as the petitioner's representation, verify the record, and decide the objection regarding selection of respondent No.5 as Anganbari Sewika by a reasoned and speaking order within 16 weeks from receipt/production of a copy of the order. ¶20

Punam Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent authorities are to be directed to consider the petitioner's objection dated 27.09.2022 against the selection of respondent No.5 as Anganbari Sewika in Gamharia Anganbari Centre, Mundro Panchayat, district Giridih, and to consider the petitioner's case for the said post.

¶17

Court's answer

With the fair submission of learned counsels for the parties, the writ application is disposed of by directing respondent No.2 (Deputy Commissioner, Giridih) to consider the writ application as the petitioner's representation and, after verification of record, take a decision in the matter.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The decision on the representation is to be taken by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Jharkhand (Deepak Roshan, J.) [23.09.2024] in W.P. (S) No. 7560 of 2023 (Punam Kumari v. State of Jharkhand & others), disposed of the writ petition, filed seeking consideration of the petitioner's objection dated 27.09.2022 (Annexure-3) to the selection of respondent No.5 as Anganbari Sewika in Gamharia Anganbari Centre, Mundro Panchayat, district Giridih. As no counter affidavit had been filed and counsel for the parties jointly submitted for such disposal, the court directed respondent No.2, the Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, to treat the writ application as the petitioner's representation and, after verification of record, pass a reasoned and speaking order within 16 weeks of receipt/production of the order's copy. No statute or precedent was cited; no adjudication on merits of the selection.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P. (S) No. 7560 of 2023

¶3

Punam Kumari, aged about 30 years, wife of Sri Lal Mohan Mahto, resident of Village & PO: Mandro, PS: Bagodar, District-Giridih.

¶4

....Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand;

¶7

Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, PO, PS & DistrictGiridih;

¶8

District Programme Officer, Giridih, PO, PS & District-Giridih;

¶9

Child Development Project Officer, Bagodar, PO & PS: Bagodar, District-Giridih;

¶10

Smt. Babita Kumari, wife of Sri Teklal Mahto, resident of Village-Gamharia, PO: Mundro, PS: Bagodar, District-Giridih.

¶11

....Respondents

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶13

¶14

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashim Kr. Sahani, Adv. Mr. Vikesh Kumar, Adv. For the Resp.-State : Mr. Zaid Imam, A.C. to S.C.-VII Mr. Z.A. Khan, A.C. to S.C.-VII ---------

¶15

04/Dated:-23.09.2024

¶16

Heard learned counsels for the parties.

¶17

2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities to consider the objection dated 27.09.2022 filed by the petitioner (Annexure-3) against the selection of the respondent No.5 on the post of Anganbari Sewika in Gamharia Anganbari Centre in Mundro Panchayat in the district of Giridih and also to consider the case of the petitioner for the said post within a specified period.

¶18

3. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submits that since no counter affidavit has been filed; as such, the matter may be disposed of by directing the respondent No.2 to dispose of the objection of the petitioner with regard to her claim of appointment as Anganbari Sewika.

¶19

4. Having regard to the fair submission of learned counsels for the parties, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the respondent No.2 to consider this writ application as representation and after verification of record, take a decision in the matter by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.

¶20

5. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of.

¶21

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶22

vikas/-

¶23

Punam Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punam Kumari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tushar Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

The Senior Divisional Railway Security Commissioner through Mr Premdeep Sanjay Vs Shamser Anshari

Harendra Kumar Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dr. Prakash Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro Secretary Cum Commissioner, Deptt of Higher and Technical Education

Madhuri Mazumder Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kalika Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand Thro the Pr Secretary, Dept of Higher Technical Education Skill Development