IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14899 of 2005 1.REKHA KUMARI, wife of Dinesh Prasad, resident of village Balwapar (Ramdayiyapur), P.S. Rahui, District Nalanda. 2.Munni Kumari, wife of Narendra Prasad, resident of village Madachak, P.S. Rahui, District Nalanda. 3.Ramrati Devi, Wife of Mahesh Ravi Das, resident of village Uttarnama, P.S. Rahui, District Nalanda. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The District Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif. 3.The District Welfare officer, Nalanda at Biharsharif. 4.C.D.P.O. Rahui, District nalanda. 5.Mukhia, Uttarnama Gram Panchayat, Nalanda. 6.Rekha Devi, wife of Musafir Paswan resident of village Utarnawan, P.S. Rahui, District nalandaq. 7.Mamta Rani, wife of Kamlesh Kumar Kamla, resident of village Madachak, P.S. Rahui, District Nalanda. 8.Nirmala Kumari, Wife of Awadhesh Kumar Verma, resident of Village Balwapar, p.S. Rahui, District nalanda. ----------- 3 18/12/2009 No one appears for the petitioners. Counsel for the State is present. Three petitioners in this case by combining together have filed a joint writ application for the following reliefs:- “(i)By issue of an appropriate writ, the selection/appointment of respondent no.6 as Sahayika and respondent no.7 and 8 as Sewika of Anganwadi be declared illegal and the same be quashed. (ii)By issue of an appropriate writ, it be held and directed that the petitioner no. 1 and 2 have been clearly and validly selected for the post of Sewika and petitioner no.3 for the post of Sahayika 2 of the Anganwadi and it be further directed that selection/appointment letter be issued to them. (iii)Respondents nos. 6 to 8 be restrained from discharging the work of Anganwadi Sewika and Sahayika and they be also stopped from receiving the Honorarium. (iv)By issue of an ad interim order, the petitioners be directed to discharge function of Anganwadi Sewika and Sahayika and they be allowed to receive the Honorarium during the pendency of this writ application.” In the opinion of this Court each of the petitioners claiming appointment on the particular post has separate cause of action and therefore they cannot join together by filing a joint writ application. In that view of the matter, this writ application must be held to be not maintainable. Accordingly this writ application is misconceived and is dismissed accordingly with a liberty to the petitioners to file separate representation, if they so advised, before the prescribed authority, i.e, the Collector of the district, and the same shall be disposed of without being influenced of the order of dismissal of this writ application. It goes without saying that any order would be passed by the Collector of the district only after affording opportunity to the petitioners, respondent nos. 6,7 and 8 as also the representative of the Gram panchayat in question. Such representation must be disposed of within 3 the time frame now fixed by the State Government in its recent circular dated 10.12.2009. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)