IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.273 of 2009 RITA DEVI . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2. 21.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 16.10.2008 communicated by memo dated 20.10.2008 from the office of the Commissioner, Purnea Division refusing to entertain the appeal of the petitioner against the order of the District Magistrate dated 5.7.2008 cancelling her selection on the post of Anganbari Sewika on the ground that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Counsel for the parties are not in controversy that a Division Bench of this Court has held that termination of appointment of an Anganbari Sewika on grounds of eligibility to appointment is the domain of the District Magistrate alone as distinct from an order of termination on grounds of dereliction of duties for which the District Programme Officer was alone competent. An appeal in the latter circumstances lies before the District Magistrate. If the District Magistrate alone was competent in the former case, surely an appeal shall lie before the Commissioner and the petitioner can not be left without the remedy of appeal. 2 Learned counsel for the State has fairly placed a Government circular dated 11.5.2010 issued by the Social Welfare Department (I.C.D.S., Directorate) Clause 3 states that where the order of termination has been passed by the District Magistrate, the appeal shall lie before the Commissioner. The impugned order is set aside. The appeal filed by the petitioner is revived on record and the Commissioner, Purnea Division shall now proceed to dispose off the same in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order after hearing the parties preferably within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands allowed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)