Allowed

Sarita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC26 Sept 2022CWJC/13134/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an appeal rejection order in a Sevika selection dispute. The High Court found the appellate order cryptic, devoid of reasons, and resulted in the appointment of a rival candidate, rendering the forum meaningless. The Court quashed the order and directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed to the extent indicated; the order dated 03.02.2018 was quashed and the petitioner was directed to present her appeal before Respondent No 3 within four weeks.

Sarita Kumari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 13134 of 2018

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Sarita Kumari wife of Binod Kumar resident of Village- Awgil Rampur Ward No. 07, P.O. Paharpur, P.S.- Mednichouki, Block- Suryagarha, DistrictLakhisarai.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶7

Director, Social Welfare Development Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger.

¶9

The District Magistrate, Lakhisarai.

¶10

The District Programme Officer, Lakhisarai.

¶11

The Sub- Divisional Officer, Lakhisarai.

¶12

The Block Development Officer, Suryagarha, Lakhisarai.

¶13

The Child Development Programme Officer, Suryagarha, Lakhisarai.

¶14

The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Awgil Rampur, P.S. Medni Chouki, District- Lakhisarai.

¶15

Seema Kumari wife of Ranjeet Kumar, resident of Village- Awgil Rampur Ward No. 12, P.S.- Mednichouki, District- Lakhisarai.

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

======================================================

¶18

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr Rabindra Kr Priyadarshi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr Prasant Pratap, GP II Mr Lala S N Rais, AC to GP II

¶19

======================================================

¶20

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

Date : 26-09-2022

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

¶24

The petitioner was selected as Sevika for Center No 58 in Ward No 7 in the district of Luckeesarai. The petitioner's selection was at Aam Sabha dated 20.12.2014. The same has been

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.13134 of 2018 dt.26-09-2022 2/4

¶26

brought to an end by order of the District Programme Officer dated 09.07.2015. The petitioner has preferred appeal against the order of the District Programme Officer. The same has been numbered as Appeal Case No 58 of 2015-1016. The petitioner’s appeal has been rejected by the Collector, Luckeesarai under order dated 03.02.2018 which has been assailed by way of the instant writ proceedings.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the appellate authority is without assigning any reason. The admitted position, however, is that, in the meantime, Respondent No 10 was directed to be appointed as Sevika for the Center in question.

¶28

Learned State Counsel submits that relying upon decision of the District Programme Officer and the material based on which the District Programme Officer has cancelled the petitioner’s selection under order dated 09.07.2015, the District Magistrate has passed the impugned order.

¶29

Upon consideration of the rival submissions, this Court would consider it appropriate to take note of the order of the District Magistrate which reads as follows:

¶30

^^mHk; i{kksa lfgr ljdkjh vf/koDrk dks lqukA fuEu U;k;ky; ds vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;kA ftyk izksxzke inkf/kdkjh] y[khljk; ds ikfjr vkns”k Kkikad&570] fnukad&

¶31

Patna High Court CWJC No.13134 of 2018 dt.26-09-2022 3/4

¶32

09-07-2015 esa la”kks/ku dh dksbZ vko”;drk ugha gSA vihy vkosnu vLohd`rA okn dh dk;Zokgh lekIr dh tkrh gSA ys[kkfir ,oa la ” kksf/kr **

¶33

Bare perusal of the order itself shows that it is cryptic in nature and without assigning any reason. The order manifests total non-consideration of the appeal. The manner, in which the appellate authority has exercised jurisdiction, renders the forum of appeal to be meaningless and, therefore, this Court finds that the order dated 03.02.2018 rejecting the petitioner’s appeal is unsustainable. The order dated 03.02.2018 is, therefore, quashed.

¶34

Against order of the District Programme Officer, the Anganwari Sevika/Sahayika Guidelines provides a forum before the Divisional Commissioner.

¶35

In the circumstances, this Court would consider it appropriate that the petitioner should present her appeal before Respondent No 3 within four weeks from today.

¶36

Upon submission of appeal within four weeks, Respondent No 3 would be under legal obligation to consider the same after hearing Respondent No 10 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶37

This writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated

¶38

above.

¶39

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

¶40

M.E.H. /-

¶41

Patna High Court CWJC No.13134 of 2018 dt.26-09-2022 4/4

¶42

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	01.10.2022
Transmission Date	NA

Sarita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shashi Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Kumar @ Munna Pal Vs The State of Bihar

Priti Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Dr. Nilam Sahay Vs The State of Bihar

Bibha Devi Vs The State of Bihar