Dismissed

Kumodni Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Sept 2022CWJC/9175/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the quashing by the Collector of the petitioner's selection as Anganwadi Sevika. The High Court found the selection jurisdiction was at the panchayat level under 2006 guidelines, but the appointing committee was irregularly constituted. Dismissing the petition, the Court upheld the cancellation of the selection.

What did the court decide?

The writ application was dismissed; the impugned order quashing the selection was upheld.

Kumodni Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Service and Employment | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9175 of 2019

¶2

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

¶3

Kumodni Devi, aged about 45 years (F) W/o Nagendra Jha, Resident of Village- Pirnagar, P.O.- Pirnagar, P.S. Gawalpara, District- Madhepura.

¶4

... ... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Commissioner, Koshi Division, Koshi.

¶8

The Deputy Director Welfare, Saharsa, Koshi Division, Koshi Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The Collector- Cum -District Magistrate, Madhepura.

¶10

The District Programme Officer, Madhepura.

¶11

The Block Development Officer, Gawalpara, Madhepura.

¶12

The Child Development Programme Officer, Gawalpara, Madhepura.

¶13

Sulekha Devi, W/o Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, Resident of Village- Pirnagar, P.O. Pirnagar, P.S. Gawalpara, District- Madhepura.

¶14

... ... Respondents

¶15

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner-s : Mr.Anil Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Asit Kumar Jha AC to GP-II ======================================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD CAV JUDGMENT

¶17

Date : 16-09-2022

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶19

counsel for the State.

¶20

2. The writ application has been filed seeking quashing of order dated 09-02-2019 vide D.B. No. 134, passed by the Collector-cum- District Magistrate, Madhepura in Appeal No. 288 of 2015, as contained in Annexure-10 to the writ petition, whereby the Collector, Madhepura has cancelled the petitioner’s selection as Anganwadi Sevika for center No. 35 in Village Pirnagar, Ward

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.9175 of 2019 dt.16-09-2022 2/6

¶22

No.6, Police Station- Gawalpara, in the District of Madhepura and directed for selection of Anganwadi Sevika afresh.

¶23

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that selection process is of a period prior to coming into force of Anganwadi Sevika/ Sahaika Chayan Margdarshika, 2016 . The selection was based on a mapping of the Poshak Kshetra and it was found that the Poshak Kshetra was predominantly comprising of general caste category. The mapping, based on which, the selection has been made has not been challenged and, therefore, cancellation of the petitioner’s selection by the impugned order dated 09-02-2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Madhepura, is not sustainable.

¶24

4. The learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the petitioner is a resident of Ward No.6, whereas the center in-question belongs to Ward No.5. The specific averment made in this regard has not been challenged or disputed by the petitioner by filing any reply to the counter affidavit. It is also submitted that against the petitioner’s selection several complaints were made. Upon enquiry, the Poshak Kshetra was found to be not predominantly of general caste population, but comprising predominantly of Extremely Backward Caste (for short ‘EBC’) category.

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.9175 of 2019 dt.16-09-2022 3/6

¶26

5. The earlier Sevika, namely, Dimple Kumari (backward caste candidate) was appointed because no candidate of EBC category was available. On account of her resignation, the selection was required to be made afresh and mapping panji was prepared afresh by one Anganwari Sevika based on which the petitioner’s selection proceeded, on the erroneous premise that the Poshak Kshetra was predominantly of general caste population. Various complaints were received. Matter was enquired and mapping panji was found to be incorrect, and petitioner’s selection was thus found to be against the rules and guidelines issued by ICDS, Department. Two reports were submitted thereafter. One by the District Program Officer, Madhepura, and other by the Block Development Officer.

¶27

6. Upon consideration of the rival submissions, this Court would find that the specific averment regarding the petitioner being resident of Ward No.6 has not been denied or disputed by the petitioner. Based on this fact only the petitioner’s selection as Sevika for Anganwadi center of Ward No.5 is unsustainable. The petitioner has claimed to be selected in proceedings of Aam Sabha dated 06-07-2009, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition. At the time of the said selection, Anganwadi Sevika Sahaika Chayan Margdarshika,

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.9175 of 2019 dt.16-09-2022 4/6

¶29

2006 ( for short ‘ 2006 Margdarshika’) were applicable, which provides two types of Selection Committees for selection of Sevika/ Sahayika . Clause 5(क) of the 2006 Margdarshika provides the constitution of Selection Committee for selection of Sevika/ Sahayika at the panchayat level . Clause 5 ( ख ) of the 2006 Margdarshika, on the other hand, contains a prescription regarding Constitution of Selection Committee for Selection of Sevika/

¶30

Sahayika at the urban/Ward level. Clause 5 (क) of the 2006 Margdarshika, reads as follows:-

¶31

“ 5.(क) पपचच ा यत स ् तरर ी य चयन समम ि मतत -समिेकत म बचाल मविकचास समेविचा ययोजनचा कमे अन्तरर्गत आआँरनबचाडरी कमेन्द्र पर सेविकचा/सहचामयकचा कमे चयन कमे मलए पपचचायत स्तर पर एक चयन म सममिमत हयोररी मजसकचा स्विरूप मनम्नवित हयोरचा:-

¶32

1.	सपबपमधित पपचचायत कमेमिमुखियचा-	अध्यक
2.	सपबपमधित पपचचायत कमे उप मिमुखियचा-	उपचाध्यक
3.	बचाल मविकचास पमरययोजनचा पदचामधिकचाररी/मजलचा पदचामधिकचाररी दचारचा प्रमतमनयमुक्त पदचामधिकचाररी (इनकरी उपमस्स्थिमत अमनविचायर्ग हयोररी)	मविशमेष आमिपमत्रित सदस्य
4.	आआँरनबचाडरी कमेन्द्र कमे पयोषक कमेत्रि समे सपबपमधित गचामि पपचचायत कमे विचारर्गसदस्य	सदस्य
5.	पपचचायत करी अनमुससूमचत जचामत/जनजचामत करी एक मिमहलचा सदस्यचा(पपचचायत दचारचामिनयोनरीत)	सदस्य

¶33

Patna High Court CWJC No.9175 of 2019 dt.16-09-2022 5/6

¶34

मनकटतमि प्रचास्थिममिक मविदचालय / सदस्य मिध्य मविदचालय कमे प्रधिचानचाध्यचापक /प्रभचाररी मशकक

¶35

पपचचायत समेविक सदस्य समचवि।

¶36

नयोट:-पपचचायत सममिमत स्तर पर उपयमुर्गक्त कपमरकचा 5 कमे आलयोक मिमें अनमुससूमचत जचामत करी दयो यचा समे अमधिक सदस्यचा उपलब्धि हहों तयो प्रश्नरत आआँरनबचाडरी कमेत्रि कयो प्रमतमनमधित्वि करनमे विचालरी सदस्यचा अस्थिविचा उम्र मिमें विररीय सदस्यचा सममिमत करी सदस्यचा हयोररी। अनमुससूमचत जचामत करी सदस्यचा उपलब्धि नहहीं हयोनमे पर क्रमिशत अत्यपत मपछडचा विरर्ग अस्थिविचा मपछडचा विरर्ग अस्थिविचा सचामिचान्य विरर्ग करी सदस्यचा सममिमत करी सदस्यचा हयोररी। "

¶37

7. From bare perusal of the proceedings of the Aam Sabha dated 06-07-2009 (Annexure-5), it is obvious that the Selection was at panchayat level. The proceedings dated 06-07-2009 (Annexure-5), clearly shows that Constitution of the Selection Committee was not as per the prescription in Clause5(क) of the 2006 Margdarshika . The petitioner’s selection by a Selection Committee which was not constituted in accordance with the 2006 Margdarshika is, therefore, clearly unsustainable for the reasons indicated above.

¶38

8. For the reasons above, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the decision of the Collector-cum- District Magistrate, Madhepura dated 09-02-2019, passed in Appeal No. 288 of 2015, as contained in Annexure-10 to the writ petition.

¶39

Patna High Court CWJC No.9175 of 2019 dt.16-09-2022 6/6

¶40

9. The writ application is devoid of merit and the same

¶41

is dismissed.

¶42

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

¶43

shyambihari/-

¶44

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	13-09-2022
Uploading Date	01-10-2022
Transmission Date	N/A

Kumodni Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumodni Devi v. The State of Bihar

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

Vinay Urano @ Vinay Urav Vs The Union of India

Raj Kishore Prasad Yadav @ Raj Kishore Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Amintar Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Rajnish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Esha Ali, Vs The State of Bihar

Lalan Kumar Jha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.