IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16899 of 2007 JANTI KUMARI Wife of Sri kaushal Kishore Nirala resident of village Akhanpur (Maldah), P.S. Alipur, Prakhand Tekari, District Gaya. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Commissioner of Magadh Division, Gaya. 3.The Collector, District Gaya. 4.The District Welfare Officer, District Gaya. 5.The Child Development Project Officer Block Tekari, District Gaya. 6.The Mukhiya Gram panchayat Kespa. P.S. Tekari, District Gaya. 7.The Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Kespa. P.S. Tekari, District Gaya. 8.Savitri kumari @ Sumitri Devi Wife of Ayodhaya Kumar of Village maldhah, p.S. Alipur, block Tekari, District Gaya. ----------- 2 18/12/2009 No one appears for the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. Prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “That by this writ application the petitioner prayed for quashing the order issued vide memo no.2235 dated 20.11.2007 (contained in Annexure-6) passed by the learned Collector, Respondent no.3, by which the learned Collector has been pleased to set aside the order of selection of the petitioner for the post of Anganbari Sevika for Centre Maldah decision taken by the Gram panchayat and in her place the selection/appointment letter has been issued to the respondent no.8 Savitri Devi which is illegal, erroneous, non consideration merit, which is illegal and under challenge.” From the aforementioned prayer it would be clear that the order has been passed by the Collector of the 2 district disposing of the representation filed by respondent no.8 by setting aside the selection/appointment of the petitioner on the post of Anganbari Sevika for Maldah centre. Under the guidelines issued by the State Government the petitioner against the such order passed by the Collector had remedy of appeal before the Commissioner of the Division and the petitioner having not availed that remedy cannot maintain this writ application. Consequently, this writ application is premature and is not maintainable. Keeping in view that this writ application on the misconceive advice had remained pending for a period over two years, this Court would give liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal even now and if such appeal is filed by the petitioner the same would be dispose of by the Commissioner of the Division within the prescribed time limit as recently fixed by the State Government in his circular dated 10.12.2009. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and has simply given permission to file an appeal. With the aforementioned observation/direction this application is dismissed. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) 3