Manoj Kunwar @ Manoj Devi Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dharamnath Pd. Yadav, Advocate Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel 04 ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN

¶15

ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 11-05-2026

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶18

counsel for the State.

¶19

The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief/s:-

¶20

“I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or such other writ/s, order/s, direction/s for quashing Memo No. 303 dated 30/08/2025, issued by Child Development Project Officer, Arreraj, East Champaran (Respondent No.-5), wherein the service of petitioner was terminated as Anganbadi

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.16842 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026 2/4

¶22

Sahayika after almost 9.5 years in service, without giving any opportunity of hearing. And/or

¶23

II. For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or such other writ/s, order/s, direction/s for quashing order dated 28/06/2025, passed in Remand Case No.63/2019, by District Programme Officer, East Champaran, Motihari (Respondent No. 4), insofar as the direction to the Child Development Project Officer, Arreraj, East Champaran (Respondent No.-5) for terminating the service of person appointed conditionally in the interregnum period on the post of Anganbadi Sahayika is concerned, And/or

¶24

III. For issuance of writ of mandamus for reinstating the petitioner as Anganbadi Sahayika at the same anganbadi centre or for appointing the petitioner at any other anganbadi centre, And/or

¶25

IV. For any other relief/s for which the petitioner is entitled in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Anganbadi Sahayika at Anganbadi Centre No. 96, Panchayat, Radhiya, Arreraj, District- East

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.16842 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026 3/4

¶28

Champaran by virtue of Annexure-P/2 dated 03.02.2017 and has been removed vide Memo No. 303 dated 30.08.2025 (Annexure-P/3), on the ground that an order has been passed by the District Programme Officer, East Champaran, Motihari in Remand Case no. 63/2019 dated 28.06.2025/30.06.2025. Counsel submits that the appointment letter was unconditional and removal has been made on the basis of a case in which, the petitioner has not been heard. Therefore, counsel submits that the said letter dated 30.08.2025 (Annexure-P/3) and order of the D.P.O., (Annexure-P/4), both are completely in gross violation of natural justice and therefore, fit to be set aside.

¶29

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that from the prayer itself, it become crystal clear that the order of the D.P.O passed in Remand Case no. 63/2019 has been challenged and the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order which is an appealable order according to the relevant margdarshika for the appointment of Anganwadi Sevika & Sahayika. Counsel submits that the relevant advertisement shall definitely indicate that this appointment was conditional as prior litigation was going on.

¶30

This Court without entering into the merit or demerit of this case and considering only the legal aspect of the

¶31

Patna High Court CWJC No.16842 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026 4/4

¶32

matter that the order of D.P.O has been challenged before this Court which is an appealable order, therefore, not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner at this juncture, save and except, grants liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order of D.P.O by filing appeal raising all the points including the points raised in the writ petition. The Appellate Authority shall, after hearing all the concerned parties and examining the advertisement pursuant to which the petitioner was appointed, decide this case on merit.

¶33

The petitioner shall file her appeal before the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari (Respondent no.3) within 30 days from today and the Respondent no.3 upon receipt of the petitioner’s appeal shall pass order within 90 days thereafter. The said 90 days shall be counted from the date of completion of appearance of all the concerned.

¶34

Accordingly, with the aforesaid direction, this writ petition stands disposed off.

¶35

(Dr. Anshuman, J)

¶36

Divyansh/-

¶37

U

Manoj Kunwar @ Manoj Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kunwar @ Manoj Devi 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

Prem Kumar Bhardwaj @ Prem Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Harinath Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Nathuni Sahni @ Nathuni Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nisha Vidyarthi Vs The State of Bihar

Sarita Devi @ Sarita Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs Institute of Banking Personnel Selection