IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8133 of 2007 SHOBHA KUMARI, wife of Shri Anil Kumar, permanent resident of village Chhihantar under the village Panchayat Raj Kitta Chauhattar (East), P.S. Maner, District Patna … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna-800001 3. The Secretary, Rural Development, Bihar, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Patna 5. Smt. Mala Kumari, the Chief Development Project Officer (C.D.P.O.) Maner Block, Patna 6. Smt. Kunti Devi, Mukhiya village Panchayat Raj Kitta Chauhattar (East) Maner, Patna 7. Smt. Rubi Kumari,wife of Shri Subodh Kumar, designate Anganwari Sevika, under village Panchayat Raj Kitta Chauhattar (East), Maner, Patna 8. Smt. Shashikala Devi, Supervisor, Wife of Sri Arbind Kumar Singh, resident of Ratan Tola under the village Panchayat Raj Manerpal, P.S. Maner, District Patna 9. Shri Rajendra Lal, father’s name not known, Panchayat Sachiv village Panchayat Raj Kitta Chhautar (East), Manger, Patna … Respondents. ----------- 3. 26.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: “(a) To issue an appropriate writ(s) order or direction to the concerned respondents to take proper action against errant officers who have indulged in manipulations and underhand practice and knowingly resorted to various omissions and commissions in appointment process of Anganbari Sevikas/ Sahaikas under the pretext 2 of Aam Sabha of the village Panchayat Raj Kitta Chauhattar (East), hereinafter to be referred as the said Panchayat and have thereby not only got rejected the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Anganbari Sevika illegally but also have deprived the toddlers of ward no.9 of the said Panchayat from affections and cares which could have got from the petitioner as Anganwari Sevika because she is the resident of the said ward no.9 of the Panchayat and belongs to Schedule Caste (Chamar) and Schedule Caste members residing in ward no.9 of the Panchayat in substantial number and the concerned authorities illegally got appointed a back ward caste (Yadav) in her place. (b) to issue an appropriate writ/ writs including the writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to convene Aam Sabha meeting legally of the panchayat and in presence of duly appointed authority of the District Magistrate (respondent no.4) in place of the C.D.P.O. so that proceedings of the Aam Sabha of the panchayat recruit the Anganbadi Sevika/ Sahaikaya in accordance with the guidelines, 2006 and the Aam Sabha meeting be called in 3 prescribed manner so that its proceedings be transparent, credible and be to the satisfaction of the general members of the panchayat aforesaid.” As with regard to the aforementioned prayer learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the whole anomaly in the selection and appointment of respondent no.7 was planned in a manner that Ward No.9 and Ward No.11 were merged together for one centre, as a result whereof the Scheduled Caste population in majority in Ward No.9 got reduced to minority on account of larger population of backward in Ward No.11. He would also submit that respondent no.7 being related to Mukhiya was not eligible for her selection and appointment. These grievances in fact were raised by the petitioner before the Collector of the District and in fact before various authorities including the Chairman of National Scheduled Caste Commission as would appear from the receipt given by the office of the Director, Scheduled Castes of 4 Government of India at Patna dated 30.4.2007 (Annexure 2). In that view of the matter as the question of facts will be required to be gone into this Court would direct the Collector of Patna District being the prescribed authority to look into the aforementioned grievance of the petitioner and if he would find that the selection and appointment of respondent no.7 was vitiated, on account of there being any violation of the provisions of the Government circular on the subject, he would first issue notice to respondent no.7 as also to the concerned Gram Panchayat and thereafter he would pass an appropriate order preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Let it be made clear that this Court in absence of any counter affidavit on record has not gone into the comparative inter se claim of the petitioner vis-à-vis respondent no.7 and therefore, the Collector of the District should decide the matter strictly in accordance with the provisions made by the Government in its circular. 5 With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/