Patna High Court - Orders
Munita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 December, 2014
Author: Samarendra Pratap Singh
Bench: Samarendra Pratap Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.751 of 2014
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17053 of 2012
======================================================
Munita Kumari Wife of Sri Ram Babu Chaudhary resident of village -
Patori, PS - Hanuman Nagar, District - Darbhanga.
.... .... Appellant.
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of
Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Incentive Child Development Services Directorate, Patna.
3. The Collector, Darbhanga at AND PO - Darbhanga, District -
Darbhanga.
4. The District Program Officer, Darbhanga at AND PO - Darbhanga,
District - Darbhanga.
5. The Child Development Program Officer, Hanuman Nagar, District -
Darbhanga.
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shambhu Nath Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP
SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 15-12-2014The instant appeal is filed against the order, dated 02.01.2014, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 17053 of 2012, whereby the writ application was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to complete the process of fresh selection on the basis of fresh demarcation of the ward with liberty to the petitioner to participate in the said procedure.
2. The writ petitioner-appellant filed the writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to complete the process of 2 Patna High Court LPA No.751 of 2014 (2) dt.15-12-2014 2/4 selection of Anganwari Sevika, for Centre No.35, at the Panchayat Raj Patori, Block Hanuman Nagar, District-Darbhanga.
3. It appears that applications were sought for the posts of Anganwari Sevika and Anganwari Sahaika for different Anganbari Centers, under Patori Panchayat, in the Block of Hanuman Nagar, District- Darbhanga. The writ petitioner- appellant, too, applied for the post of Anganwari Sevika.
4. The case of the writ petitioner is that her name was at the top of the merit list published by the office of Child Development Project Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'the C.D.P.O.'), Hanuman Nagar, District Darbhanga, and one month thereafter, i.e., on 13.04.2012, a fresh merit list was published, wherein she again headed the merit list.
5. The grievance of the writ petitioner-appellant is that the respondents on one reason or another is not giving effect to the merit list and, as such, she sought for direction to be issued to the respondents to complete the selection process.
6. A counter affidavit has been filed, on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 to 5, as well as Supplementary counter affidavit by Nibha Kumari, C.D.P.O., Hayaghat, who was also In-charge of Hanuman Nagar Block.
7. The case of the respondents is that some dispute 3 Patna High Court LPA No.751 of 2014 (2) dt.15-12-2014 3/4 arose among the beneficiaries of the said Poshak Kshetra and, as such, a decision was taken to make an enquiry and not to go ahead with the selection process and, upon taking an over all stock of complaints and directions contained in the letter No. 3609, dated 09.10.2012, and the letter No. 3792 dated, 19.10.2012, the Chief Development Officer, Hanuman Nagar, vide his letter, dated 02.11.2012, shifted the Poshak Kshetra into different wards and accordingly, ward wise Parisiman has been prepared. It is the further stand of respondents that selection list was provisional.
8. The writ petitioner-appellant submits that Poshak Kshetra of Center No. 35 has been altered to favour such candidates, who had applied for the said post in respect of Centre No.37 of Hanuman Nagar Block. She submits that designation of Poshak Kshetra has not yet been made, which demonstrates that earlier selection process was stalled only with a view to preventing her from being selected as Anganwari Sevika.
9. It is well settled that a candidate will not have any indefeasible right for appointment merely because he or she has been selected. The employer, for valid reasons, may not give effect to a select list. The writ petitioner-appellant has not been able to demonstrate that the action of the respondents in not giving effect to the selection is arbitrary or for that matter, any one, lower 4 Patna High Court LPA No.751 of 2014 (2) dt.15-12-2014 4/4 down in the merit list, has been selected.
10. The grievance of the writ petitioner-appellant, in fact, is that no designation of Poshak Kshetra has taken place. This is, as pointed out by the learned single Judge, a disputed question of fact and requires holding of roving enquiry and taking evidence, which is not proper in a writ proceeding of the present nature. The learned single Judge, therefore, while directing the respondents to complete the selection process on the basis of fresh demarcation, also granted liberty to the writ petitioner-appellant to participate in the selection process, which may be held, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned single Judge.
11. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(I. A. Ansari, ACJ.) (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.) Uday/-
U