IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8299 of 2009 Usha Kumari Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors 2/ 05/08/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Aggrieved by the selection and appointment of another i.e. Indu Prabha, as Angan Bari Sevika, the petitioner moved the District Magistrate who held that the appointment of the former having lesser marks was not justified set aside the appointment and directed fresh selection. The grievance of the petitioner is that she was an applicant under the same process. The District Magistrate should have directed her appointment instead of ordering for fresh selection process. Learned counsel for the State submits that the moment another candidate was appointed, the vacancy stood exhausted. If the appointment was subsequently found to be wrong, fresh advertisement and selection had to be resorted to which has been done by the District Magistrate. The petitioner could also have applied. Upholding the argument on behalf of the State, the Court observes that if the respondents resort to a 2 fresh selection process, unless already done, and if the petitioner applies, the disinclination of the Court to entertain the present writ application can be no impediment to the merit consideration of her claim. The writ application stands disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)