Patna High Court
Anita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar on 12 December, 2023
Author: Mohit Kumar Shah
Bench: Mohit Kumar Shah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6467 of 2022
======================================================
Anita Kumari wife of Amrendra Kumar, resident of Village- Dharampur,
Anchal- Sahar, Panchayat- Andhari Ward No. 12, Police Station- Chauri,
District- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare
Department (ICDS), Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara.
3. The Additional District Collector, Bhojpur at Ara.
4. The District Program Officer, Bhojpur at Ara.
5. The Child Development Project Officer, Sahar, Bhojpur.
6. Lady Supervisor, ICDS Sahar, Bhojpur, Ward No. 12, Panchayat- Andhari
Sahar, Bhojpur.
7. The Block Development Officer, Sahar District- Bhojpur.
8. Sumanti Kumari wife of Satendra Kumar, resident of Village- Dharampur,
Post- Koldiha, Police Station- Chauri, Block- Sahar, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rama Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt. Kumari Amrita (Gp3)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 12-12-2023
1. The present writ petition has been filed
seeking the following reliefs:-
"1(i). For quashing of selection-cum-
appointment letter dated 24.6.2019
contained in Annexure-4 whereby
respondent no.8 Sumanti Kumari has
been appointed as Anganwari Sevika
at Anganwari Centre, Dharampur
Eastern part Centre Code-114, Ward
Patna High Court CWJC No.6467 of 2022 dt.12-12-2023
2/5
No.12, Andhari Panchayat Anchal-
Sahar, District-Bhojpur.
II. For quashing of order dated
27.01.2022
passed in Anganwari
Appeal No.1/2020, contained in
Annexure-7, whereby the petitioner's
appeal has been rejected erroneously
without appreciating the open truth
of the matter.
III. For consequential direction to
respondent to issue
selection/appointment letter in favour
of petitioner being 2nd in final merit
list.
IV. During pendency of this
application, the functioning of
respondent Sumanti Devi as
Anganwari Sevika being based upon
forged document, may be kept in
abeyance."
2. At this juncture, this Court would refer to
a judgment rendered by a co-ordinate Bench of
this Court in the case of Seema Kumari vs. The
State of Bihar and others, reported in (2015)
SCC Online Pat 7267, paragraphs no. 9 to 11
whereof, are reproduced herein below:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.6467 of 2022 dt.12-12-2023
"9. As noted above, the Anganbari
Sevika is not a government servant
and has no protection under Article
311(2) of the Constitution of India so
as to envisage the concept of regular
departmental proceeding. The
petitioner was given a notice. She
was informed about the allegation
against her. She had filed her show-
cause reply which was considered by
the District Programme officer and
when the order went against her, she
had also been given adequate
opportunity by the appellate authority
who, in fact, had himself got the
matter verified by referring the
matter to the Bihar Sanskrit Board.
10. In that view of the matter, this
Court would not find any error in the
impugned order of termination of the
services of the petitioner when it is
found that the petitioner had got
appointment by producing a
document in support of qualification
which was found to be
incorrect/forged.
11. Thus for the reasons indicated
above, this application must fail and
Patna High Court CWJC No.6467 of 2022 dt.12-12-2023
is, accordingly, dismissed."
3. It would be apt to refer to yet another
judgment rendered by the learned Division Bench
of this Court in the case of Neetu Kumari v. The
State of Bihar and others, reported in 2011 (4)
PLJR 20, paragraphs no. 4 and 5 whereof are
reproduced herein below:-
"4. In our considered view, the post of
Anganbari Sevika is not a post having
security of tenure or protection under
Article 311 of Constitution of India.
Considering the very nature of
engagement which provides of
honorarium, we are of the view that in
case the appellant still feels
aggrieved, she may approach the
Civil Court for damages. There is
nothing at stake in such a scheme
other than honorarium. For such
contractual engagements the relief of
reinstatement is not appropriate and
even if there is breach of the scheme
or any other principle of law, the claim
should ordinarily be permitted, if
found good on merits, only for
damages.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6467 of 2022 dt.12-12-2023
5. The appeal is dismissed."
4. Considering the law laid down by the
learned Division Bench of this Court, as aforesaid,
the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks not to
press the present writ petition, however, seeks
liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail such
other alternative remedies as are otherwise
available under the law. Liberty, so sought, is
granted.
5. The writ petition stands disposed off as
not pressed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
kanchan/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 13.12.2023
Transmission Date NA
