Patna High Court
Madhu Kumari vs State Of Bihar Through The ... on 28 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2921 of 2021
======================================================
Madhu Kumari, W/o - Jaykaran Sah, resident of Village - Dharphari, Ward
No. - 3, P.S. - Devariya, Block - Paru, Dist- Dist- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director, ICDS, Patna.
4. District Magistrate, District - Muzaffarpur.
5. The District Programme Officer (establishment), Dist- Muzaffarpur.
6. The Child Development Project Officer, Block - Paru, Dist- Muzaffarpur.
7. Sunita Kumari, W/o - Santosh Kumar, resident of Ward No. - 3, Gram
Panchayat Raj- Dharphari, Block - Paru, Dist- muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Shankar Choubey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Gyan Shankar Ojha, GA-7
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 28-01-2022
This matter is heard via video conferencing due to
circumstances prevailing on account of COVID-19 Pandemic.
2. Service of notice to 7th respondent Sunita Kumari is
dispensed with, since no adverse order is passed.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:
"i. For the issuance of appropriate Writ/ Writs, Order/
Orders, Direction/ Directions in the nature of Writ of
Certiorari for setting aside the order dated 4.11.2020
containing memo no. 2479 passed by the District
Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur, whereby and
Patna High Court CWJC No.2921 of 2021 dt.28-01-2022
whereunder the selection and appointment of the
petitioner on the post of Aanganbari Sevika on center
no. 299 in ward no -3, Dharphari Bazar has been
cancelled on the ground that the certificate on the basis
of which the selection of the petitioner has been made
is not given legality by the Govt. of Bihar.
ii. For issuance of Writ of mandamus directing and
commanding the respondent authorities to not disturb
the selection of the petitioner who has been selected
and appointed after completion of the due process
under law.
iii. And for the other necessary relief/reliefs on the
basis of the facts and circumstances of the case stated
and enumerated hereinafter."
5. The petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal before
the Appellate Authority. In the light of the Apex Court decision in
the case of State of Jammu and Kashmir V/s. R.K.Zalpuri and
others, reported in AIR 2016 SC 3006 (para 20), the present
petition is premature. Para 20 reads as under:
"20. Having stated thus, it is useful to refer to a passage
form City and Industrial Development Corporation V/s. Dosu
Aardeshir Bhiwandiwala and others {(2009) 1 SCC 168},
wherein this Court while dwelling upon jurisdiction under
Article 226 of the Constitution, has expressed thus:-
"The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article
226 is duty-bound to consider whether:
(a) Adjudication of writ petition involves any complex and
disputed question of facts and whether they can be
satisfactorily resolved;
Patna High Court CWJC No.2921 of 2021 dt.28-01-2022
(b) The petition reveals all material facts;
(c) The petitioner has any alternative or effective remedy
for the resolution of the dispute;
(d) Person invoking the jurisdiction is guilty of
unexplained delay and laches;
(e) Ex facie barred by any laws of limitation;
(f) Grant of relief is against public policy or barred by any
valid law; and host of other factors;"
6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of
reserving liberty to the petitioner to prefer appeal before the
Appellate Authority. If such appeal is filed by the petitioner before
the Appellate Authority, the Appellate Authority is hereby directed
to examine the petitioner's appeal while hearing the petitioner and
7th respondent, namely, Sunita Kumari.
7. The above exercise shall be completed within a period
of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. The writ petition stands disposed of.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
uday/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 02.02.2022
Transmission Date NA
