Madhulata Kumari vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 452 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14391 of 2015
     ======================================================

Madhulata Kumari Wife of Jawala Singh, Resident of Village - Babhani, Police Station - Karahagar, District - Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt.

of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas.

3. The District Programme Officer, Sasaram, Rohtas.

4. The Child Development Project Officer, Karahar, Rohtas.

5. Nilu Verma, Wife of Balwant Kumar Resident of Village - Babhani, P.s. -

Kareghar, District - Rohtas.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. J.P. Karn- AAG-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 30-01-2023

In this writ petition grievance raised is relating to

appointment of Anganwari Worker.

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 Anganwari Worker does not fall within the purview of

State or Subordinate Services. The post of Anganwari Worker is

under a scheme introduced by Govt. of India and respective State

Govts. 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.

Of course, under the guidelines, grievance against Patna High Court CWJC No.14391 of 2015 dt.30-01-2023

appointment of Anganwari Worker can be raised before the

Collector of concerned District with a further revision to the

Commissioner.

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

Anganwari 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.

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.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed with the

aforesaid liberty.

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) amit/-

Item no.41 AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date