Dismissed¶26

Pinki Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Apr 2024CWJC/3394/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anganwadi appointment dispute between private parties (petitioner Pinki Kumari; private respondent Reeta Kumar) with State ICDS functionaries; writ petition dismissed as infructuous for failure to exhaust the forum prescribed under the Aaganwadi appointment Guidelines; prematurity/alternative-forum objection raised by State counsel; petitioner absent on successive dates (28.03.2024 and 05.04.2024); liberty granted to approach original forum within 60 days; no appearance for petitioner; Patna High Court; CWJC No.3394 of 2020; decided 05-04-2024; single judge (Dr. Anshuman, J.).

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to move before the original forum under the Aaganwadi Guidelines within 60 days from the date of the order. ¶26

Pinki Kumari Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3394 of 2020

¶2

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

¶3

Pinki Kumari Wife of Munesh Lal Yadav Resident of Village-Muja Bangara, Ward No.3, P.S.-Deoria, District-Muzaffarpur.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through The Director, I.C.D.S., Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur,

¶8

The District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur.

¶9

The Block Development Officer, Paroo, Muzaffarpur.

¶10

The Child Development Project Officer, Paroo, Muzaffarpur.

¶11

Supervisor Officer, Paroo, Muzaffarpur

¶12

Reeta Kumar Wifeof Gagan Ray, Resident of Village-Muja Bangara, Ward No.3, P.S.-Deoria, District-Muzaffarpur.

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

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

¶15

Appearance :

¶16

For the Petitioner/s : None. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Gyan Prakash Ojha (GA7) : MR. Sanghamitra Ghosh, AC to GA7

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶19

3 05-04-2024

¶20

Upon repeated calls, no one appears on behalf of the

¶21

petitioner however, counsel for State is present.

¶22

It transpires to this Court that vide order dated 28.03.2024, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner also and the case has been adjourned for one week as a matter of last indulgence.

¶23

Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has not challenged the original order before any forum and directly come before this Hon’ble Court. According to him, this case is premature.

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.3394 of 2020(3) dt.05-04-2024 2/2

¶25

In the light of the submissions made and upon perusal of the records, it transpires to this Court that the petitioner has not moved before the forum prescribed under the Guidelines for appointment of Aaganwadi.

¶26

As such, the present writ petition stands dismissed as having become infructuous with liberty to the petitioner that he may move before the original forum under the Aaganwadi Guidelines within 60 days from today.

¶27

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

¶28

Prakashmani/-

¶29

Pinki Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pinki Kumari v. The State of Bihar

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

Ramawati Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Rakesh Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Kumar Singh @ Arun Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Kumar Yadav, Vs The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.

Kiran Kumari Vs The State of Bihar