Binita Kumari vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 632 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21191 of 2013
     ======================================================

Binita Kumari Wife Of Sri Shiv Kumar Sah Resident Of Village - Kadmaha, P.O. - Mungraha, P.S. - Marauna, District - Supaul ... Petitioner Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Supaul

3. The District Programme Officer, Supaul

4. The Child Development Project Officer, Marauna ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Suraj Narain Yadav, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sita Ram Yadav, GP XVI with Mr. Jitendra Kumar, AC to GP XVI ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 02-02-2023

1. In this writ petition grievance raised is relating to

appointment of Anganwadi Worker.

2. In CWJC No. 21963 of 2014 decided on

12.12.2022 (Reena Kumari Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.,) this

Court has held that the post of Anganwadi Worker does not fall

within the purview of State or Subordinate Services. The post of

Anganwadi Worker is under a scheme introduced by Govt. of India

and respective State Governments and regulated by guidelines

which are non-statutory and therefore not enforceable

in law. The appointment is on honorarium basis and no statutory

procedure has been laid down.

Patna High Court CWJC No.21191 of 2013 dt.02-02-2023

3. Of course, under the guidelines, grievance against

appointment of Anganwadi Worker can be raised before the

Collector of concerned District with a further revision to the

Commissioner.

4. Even the orders passed by the Collector or the

Commissioner would not be a subject matter of judicial review

as the power being exercised by them relating to a dispute of

Anganwadi Worker is under guidelines and they do not act as a

statutory authority while deciding such dispute. In view thereof,

the writ petition would not be maintainable even against the

orders of the Collector or the Commissioner.

5. Leaving it open to the respective writ petition to

avail any of the aforesaid remedies, if they have not so availed,

the writ petition is held to be not maintainable.

6. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed with the

aforesaid liberty.

7. If an appeal/revision is filed, the same shall be decided

expeditiously within a period of six months and the question of

limitation will not arise.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Shamshad/-

AFR/NAFR                 NAFR
CAV DATE                 NA
Uploading Date           04.02.2023
Transmission Date        NA