Wednesday, 20, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sunita Devi vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 4823 Patna

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4823 Patna
Judgement Date : 6 December, 2022

Patna High Court
Sunita Devi vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 6 December, 2022
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.448 of 2018
     ======================================================

Sunita Devi, Wife of Shri Harikant Tanti, Resident of Village- Neema (Mubarakpur), Ward No.-5, Panchayat- Sabalbigha, P.O.- Bahramba, Block and P.S.- Sikandara, District- Jamui Bihar.

... ... Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Social Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Jamui.

5. District Programme Officer (D.P.O. Jamui,

6. Child Development Project Officer C.D.P.O., Sikandra, Jamui.

7. Lucy Kumari, Wife of Shri Nawal Kumar, Resident of Village- Neema (Mubarakpur), Ward No.-5, Panchayat- Sabalbigha, P.O.- Bahramba, Block and P.S.- Sikandara, District- Jamui ( Bihar).

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Narayan, Sr. Adv with Mr.Anant Kumar Sinha, Adv.

     For the State         :       Mr. S.K.Mandal - SC3
     For the Resp. No.7    :       Mr. S.P. Parasar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD CAV JUDGMENT Date : 06-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

counsel for the private respondent No.7 and learned counsel for

the State.

2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Jamui, on a

complaint made by respondent No.7, has directed the petitioner to

file the admit card, in original based on which, she claims to have

appeared at the Madhyama examination, and also for constitution

of a Medical Board, to ascertain the age of the petitioner (working Patna High Court CWJC No.448 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

Sevika). This order dated 01.12.2017 is assailed by the petitioner

in the instant proceedings .

3. The brief factual background is that on 19.12.2012,

Center No. 152, Neema Mubarakpur in the Sabal Bigha

Panchayat of Sikandara Block was advertised along with other

centers for selection of Anganwari Sevika and Sahayika. The

petitioner had applied. She was placed in the merit list at 1 st

position having merit marks 72. The respondent No.7 was placed

at Serial No.2 with merit marks 69.8. The Respondent No.7 lodged

a complaint alleging that the petitioner's Madhyama Certificate is

false. The petitioner appeared and the Madhyama certificate was

verified and found to be genuine, as per report of the District

Programme Officer, Jamui, ( for brevity 'DPO' Jamui') dated

21-02-2015, as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition.

4. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Aam Sabha of

the Panchayat on 16.06.2014 where respondent No.7 again

challenged the petitioner's candidature based on Date of Birth. The

DPO, Jamui, thereafter, having considered the fact that the

petitioner's certificate was earlier verified, directed the Child

Development Project Officer, Sikandara ( for short 'CDPO,

Sikandara') that the petitioner's selection can be proceeded with.

Accordingly, the petitioner was issued a selection letter dated Patna High Court CWJC No.448 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

08-07-2015 and has since been discharging the responsibilities of

Anganwari Sevika for center No. 152.

5. The respondent No.7, on the other hand, continued to

challenge the petitioner's candidature at various levels. She also

filed a Service Appeal No. 51/29 of 2015 before the Deputy

Director, Welfare, Munger, alleging that the petitioner had

obtained selection on the basis of wrong Date of Birth. The appeal

later came to be transferred to Collector, Jamui and the appeal was

dismissed allowing the private respondent No. 7 to approach the

DPO.

6. The respondent No.7, thereafter filed a complaint

before the DPO, Jamui bearing Complaint No.15/2016. The

complaint of the respondent No.7 regarding forged and fabricated

Educational certificate containing wrong Date of Birth was

dismissed. The DPO found that the petitioner's Date of Birth

14-03-1986, recorded in the certificate issued by the Bihar

Sanskrit Shiksha Board bearing No. 0181407 has already been

verified and, therefore, the complaint regarding the certificate and

Date of Birth is without any basis. The complaint was thus,

rejected by the DPO, under order dated 07-04-2017, as contained

in Annnexure-5 to the writ petition.

Patna High Court CWJC No.448 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

7. The DPO's order was assailed before the District

Magistrate-cum- Collector, Jamui, in Service Appeal No. 2 of

2017, wherein, the impugned order directing for ascertaining the

petitioner's age by a Medical Board to be constituted, has been

passed.

8. The learned senior counsel appearing for the

petitioner has submitted that the issue had already been verified

and verification accepted by the CDPO, Sikandara as well as DPO,

Jamui. In the circumstances, constitution of a Medical Board to

ascertain the age of the petitioner is wholly unwarranted. The

complaints are being made by private respondent on extraneous

consideration repeatedly at all levels. It is also submitted that the

ICDS letter dated 9-5-2012, provides in Clause 1 (ख), as follows:-

"1(ख) जन्म ततितथ/उम्र कका तनिरर्धारण ननमन तिररीकक सक तकयका जकायकगका:-

(i) ममैतट्रिक यका उच्चतिर ययोग्यतिकारकाररी सकतविकका /सहकातयकका करी जन्म ततितथ, उनिकक ममैतट्रिक अथविका समकक पररीकका उतरीणर्ण प्रमकाण -पत्र ममें अअंतकति जन्म ततितथ मकानिका जकायकगका।

(ii) निनिन् ममैतट्रिक सकतविकका/ सहकातयकका कका जन्म ततितथ उनिकक शमैकतणक ययोग्यतिका सम्बन्ररी प्रमकाण -पत्र स्ककल पतरत्यकाग प्रमकाण पत्र कयो मकानिका जकायकगका।

(iii) विमैसरी सकाकर सहकातयकका तजसकक पकास शमैकतणक यका सरककाररी जन्म प्रमकाण -पत्र आतदि उपलब्र नि हयो विमैसक मकामललों ममें आययु कका तनिरर्धारण मकतडिकल बयोडिर्ण दकारका करकायका जकायकगका। "

Patna High Court CWJC No.448 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

9. As per decision of the ICDS, Directorate, it is the

Matriculation certificate, or equivalent which has to be taken for

determining the Date of Birth/age of the candidate. In the

circumstances, impugned order of the Collector, directing for

constitution of a Medical Board, is unsustainable. Apparently, the

District Magistrate is giving undue advantage to Respondent No.7.

Since the Date of Birth stands verified on the basis of petitioner's

Madhyama certificate, as per decision dated 09-05-2012 of the

I.C.D.S, Directorate, there is no requirement whatsoever, for

constitution of a Medical Board.

10. The learned State counsel, on the other hand,

submits that as per petitioner's Date of Birth recorded in

Madhyama certificate and her daughter's Date of Birth recorded

in her Matriculation certificate, the age gap of the petitioner with

her daughter is 08 years only, which appears to be highly

improbable, to say the least. It is, under such circumstance, that the

Collector, has considered it appropriate for Constitution of a

Medical Board to ascertain the petitioner's age.

11. On consideration of the rival submissions, this Court

would take notice of the fact that the age gap of the petitioner with

that of her daughter being 08 years only based on age recorded in

their respective certificates, is not a fact in dispute. In view of Patna High Court CWJC No.448 of 2018 dt.06-12-2022

such unique circumstance, this Court would observe that the order

of the District Magistrate, directing for constitution of a Medical

Board for ascertaining the petitioner's age for the limited purposes

of process of selection in-question, appears to be the only fair

resolution available. The exercise being undertaken, would only be

for the limited purposes of the process of selection in question.

With this clarification, this Court, based on the reasons and

discussion made above, does not find any reason to interfere with

the impugned order dated 01-12-2017 passed by the Collector in

Service Appeal No. 2 of 2017, as contained in Annexure-7 to the

writ petition.

12. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

shyambihari/-

AFR/NAFR                AFR
CAV DATE                20-09-2022
Uploading Date          21-12-2022
Transmission Date
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter