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

Punam Devi vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 4505 Patna

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 4505 Patna
Judgement Date : 12 September, 2023

Patna High Court
Punam Devi vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 12 September, 2023
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 1084 of 2018
     ======================================================

Punam Devi Wife of Lalan Kumar Mehta, Resident of Village-Bhelwa, Ward No.8, P.O.-Babhani, P.S.-Gamharia, District-Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Madhepura.

3. The District Programme Officer, Madhepura

4. The Child Development Programme Officer, Gamharia, District-Madhepura.

5. The Mukhiya, Bhelwa Gram Panchayat, Block Gamharia, District-

Madhepura.

6. Sujata devi, Wife of Sri Vinod Kumar Mehta, Resident of Village-Bhelwa, Ward No. 08, P.O.-Babhani Gram Panchayat Bhelwa, P.S.-Gamharia, District-Madhepura.

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

For the Petitioner/s : M/s Rajeev Kr Singh, Shailendra Kr Singh, Advs For the S t a t e : Ms Sanghamitra Choubey, AC to GA VII For Respondent No 6 : Mr Anant Kumar No 1, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 12-09-2023

Heard Mr Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Mr Anant Kumar No 1 who represents respondent No 6

and Ms Sanghamitra Choubey, learned AC to GA VII for the State.

2 This writ petition has been filed for the following

reliefs:

"That this writ application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing the order dated 24.11.2017 passed by learned Collector cum District Magistrate, Patna High Court CWJC No.1084 of 2018 dt.12-09-2023

Madhepura (Respondent No 2) passed in Anganbadi Appeal No 7 of 2016 as contained in Annexure 7 wherein and whereby the Collector cum District Magistrate, Madhepura has cancelled the selection letter of the petitioner issued by the District Programme Officer, Madhepura vide Memo No 369/2 Pro, dated 31.09.2016 and by the Child Development Project Officer, Gamharia and further directed the District Programme Officer, Madhepura to select Anganbadi Sevika in new process under the prescribed provision and process under his own supervision."

3 It is the case of the petitioner that in the Aam Sabha,

taking into account that respondent No 6 was having two birth

certificates, she was selected being at serial No 2. However, the

appellate authority, the District Magistrate, Madhepura, after

hearing the parties vide an order dated 24.11.2017 in Appeal No 7

of 2016, gave direction for fresh selection of Angan Bari Sevika

relating to Ward No 8 (Center No 74), Gram Panchayat - Bhelwar

under Gamhariya Block in the district of Madhepura.

4 It is the submission of learned counsel for the

petitioner that two grounds were taken by the respondent-District

Magistrate for passing the order and directing fresh selection.

(i) The last date of submission of the application was 30.06.2013 wherein residential/caste certificate were submitted by the petitioner on 03.07.2013 issued on 01.07.2013.

(ii) the concerned ward member, who was chairing the meeting, has not signed the Patna High Court CWJC No.1084 of 2018 dt.12-09-2023

proceeding and only the signature of the concerned CDPO is there (Anexure 7 to the writ petition).

5 Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court

to the guidelines prevalent at that time which is Angan Bari

Sevika/Sahayika Selection Guideline, 2010 with specific reference

to Clause 6.5 to show that in case of absence of the candidate

and/or the relevant document, the same cannot be rejected.

6 Learned counsel for the petitioner, as such, submits

that the District Magistrate, Madhepura erred in holding that only

because there was three days delay in submitting the documents,

she cannot be considered.

7 So far as the signature of the Chairman is concerned,

by way of supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the

petitioner has brought on record Annexure 9 which is the

proceeding dated 20.12.2014 of the said Aam Sabha and has taken

to the last page to show that the Chairman, Ashok Paswan actually

signed the document. He, as such, submits that on both counts, the

District Magistrate erred and in that background, the petitioner is

entitled to continue on the post on which she was selected as

pursuant to the interim relief granted to her on 19.01.2018, she is

still continuing to the satisfaction of the respondent-authorities. Patna High Court CWJC No.1084 of 2018 dt.12-09-2023

8 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No

6, on the other hand, by way of counter affidavit, has brought the

same proceeding to show that in the supplementary affidavit, the

signature of the Chairman has been forged inasmuch as the copy of

the proceeding which she has annexed as Annexure C/F, the

signature of the Chairman is missing.

9 This Court has gone through both the annexures

presented by the petitioner as also by respondent No 6 and finds

that while in the supplementary affidavit of the petitioner, the

Chairman's signature is there, in the counter affidavit of

respondent No 6, the same is missing. Learned counsel for the

petitioner Mr Rajeev Kumar Singh submits that the concerned

annexure clearly shows that the CDPO, Gamhariya has put in her

signature. This has been obtained by the petitioner under RTI Act

which she has stated in paragraph 3 of the supplementary affidavit.

10 This is a serious issue. The finding of the District

Magistrate, Madhepura is that the signature of the Chairman was

not on the proceeding. The annexure attached with the counter

affidavit is on the same line. However, the case of the petitioner is

that the Chairman has signed the document which has been

annexed in the supplementary affidavit. Though the case of the

petitioner is that the same has been obtained through RTI Act, the Patna High Court CWJC No.1084 of 2018 dt.12-09-2023

concerned page (the forwarding letter), by which RTI information

has been provided, is missing in the supplementary affidavit.

11 In that background, this writ petition stands disposed

of with clear direction to the District Magistrate, Madhepura to

(i) to enquire whether the claim of the petitioner, as made in supplementary affidavit that the document has been obtained through RTI Act which has signature of the Chairman, Ashok Paswan is correct or not?

(ii) Whether in that background, the document annexed by respondent No 6 in which the signature of the Chairman is missing, which is also the findings of the District Magistrate, Madhepura is correct or not?

12 In case it is found that the petitioner used forged

documents to support her case in the writ petition, necessary steps

be taken against her including lodging of the FIR against her.

Alternatively, the action be taken against respondent No 6 if her

document is found to have been manipulated.

13 Both the petitioner and respondent No 6 will be

presenting their respective documents attached in the writ petition

before the District Magistrate, Madhepura by way of

application/representation within four weeks from today who shall

take up the matter, enquire the same, ascertain with the concerned

office of the CDPO, Gamhariya whether the document in question

has been issued under RTI Act or not and/or whether the Chairman Patna High Court CWJC No.1084 of 2018 dt.12-09-2023

has put in his signature or not, as claimed by the petitioner and

take the matter to its logical conclusion within a period of three

months from the date of submission of the application/

representation by the petitioner/respondent No 6.

14 Any such order passed by the District Magistrate,

Madhepura will automatically affect the case of the petitioner and

in case it is found that the document, annexed by the petitioner in

supplementary affidavit, has been issued under RTI Act, she will

continue on the post she is holding.

15 The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid

observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) M.E.H./-

AFR/NAFR                   NAFR
CAV DATE                    NA
Uploading Date          18.09.2023
Transmission Date           NA
 

 
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