Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Satwanti Devi vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 January, 2018

Author: Jyoti Saran

Bench: Jyoti Saran

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2972 of 2016
===========================================================
Satwanti Devi, wife of Shambhu Chaudhary, resident of Village- Baijalpur, P.S.-
Uphara, District- Aurangabad.
                                                                .... .... Petitioner
                                       Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Director, ICDS, Bihar, Patna.
5. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad.
6. The District Program Officer (Establishment), Aurangabad.
7. The Child Development Project Officer, Goh, Aurangabad.
                                                             .... .... Respondents
===========================================================
       Appearance :
       For the Petitioner/s     : Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, Adv.
       For the Respondent/s     : Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8
                                    Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to SC-8
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 18-01-2018

               Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel

   appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, learned

   SC-8, for the State.

               The petitioner is aggrieved by Advertisement No. 01 of

   2016 in so far as it relates to appointment of Anganwari Sevika for

   Goh Block, Uphara Panchayat, Baijalpur-III, Center No.20, Ward

   No.5, in the district of Aurangabad appearing at serial no. 153.

               The grievance of the petitioner is that selection process was

   initiated in 2013 vide Annexure 1 and pursuant thereto a merit list was

   prepared, a copy of which is at Annexure 3 and while according to the
 Patna High Court CWJC No.2972 of 2016 dt.18-01-2018                            2




        petitioner, the person at serial nos. 1 and 2 were not entitled for

        appointment and which would have gone to the petitioner appearing at

        serial no.3 but the selection process was abandoned midway to the

        detriment to the petitioner. It is complaining thus that she has come

        before his Court.

                     A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the District

        Magistrate and others connected to inform that the selection process is

        going to be initiated. On information sought as to the advertisement

        for the same that today Mr. Prasad produced letter No. 63 dated

        16.1.2018

to inform that the selection process is practically over for pursuant to the new selection process two candidates applied, namely, Ruby Kumari and Kusum Kumari but the petitioner did not chose to apply. It is submitted that an Aam Sabha was convened on 3.5.2017 and in which Ruby Kumari has been selected.

Let the instructions dated 16.1.2018 be maintained on the record of the proceedings.

The records of the proceeding neither shows any complaint made by the petitioner before the statutory authorities under the guidelines regulating the appointment of Anganwari Sevika nor was the petitioner vigilant enough to approach this Court within a reasonable time, rather a selection process initiated in 2013 in which a merit list was prepared in 2014 that the petitioner has come Patna High Court CWJC No.2972 of 2016 dt.18-01-2018 3 complaining against advertisement published in 2016 with a prayer to direct the respondents for completion of the previous selection process.

The laches is entirely of the petitioner in neither approaching the statutory authorities nor the Court within a reasonable time in respect of earlier selection process and since admittedly she has not participated in the present selection process which has been completed, she has no claim to the post.

The writ petition is disposed of.

(Jyoti Saran, J) Surendra/-

AFR/NAFR       NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 30.01.2018
Transmission NA
Date