IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.909 of 2005 Banju Devi, Wife of Sri Rakesh Thakur, Resident of Village Siswa Kharar, P.O. Siswa Kharar, P.S. Kalyanpur, District East Champaran. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran. 3. The District Welfare Officer, East Champaran. 4. The Child Development Project Officer, Kalyanpur, District East Champaran. 5. The Block Development Officer, Kalyanpur, District East Champaran. 6. The Mukhia, Siswa Kharar Gram Panchayat, P.S. Kalyanpur, District East Champaran. 7. Gunjan Devi, Wife of Nageshwar Prasad, Resident of Village Siswa Kharar, P.S. Kalyanpur, District East Champaran. --------- Respondents ----------- 10 12.11.2009 Heard counsel for the parties. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- 1(I) For issuance of a writ in the nature of ‘Mandamus’ directing the respondents concerned to select and appoint the petitioner on the post of Anganwri Sewika on Centre no.6, Bara tola Siswa Kharar within Siswa Kharar Panchayat, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran as the petitioner is the single eligible candidate for the same as the petitioner belong to the inhabitant region of the Centre. (II) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the concerned respondents to cancel the appointment of the Respondent no.7 2 who has illegally and arbitrarily been selected and appointed on the post of Anganwari Sevika on Centre no.6, Barka tola Siswa Kharar, within the Siswa Kharar Panchayat, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran.” With reference to the aforementioned relief, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised only two questions, namely, that the respondent no.7 cannot be said to be belonged to the group of below the poverty line, inasmuch as, her husband is an employee in the Indian Army. It has further been submitted that as a matter of fact, the respondent no.7 is not the resident of the tola in which she has been appointed as an Anganwari Sevika. The official respondents have also filed their counter affidavit and they have stated to the contrary at least with regard to the residential description of the husband of the petitioner being employed in Indian Army not in any way seems to have been taken into consideration by any of the authority and in fact the Gram Sabha, while making selection, does not seem to be made aware of the fact that the husband of the respondent no.7 was employed in the Indian Army. 3 When the private respondent no.7 after appearance through Vakalatnama has not filed any counter affidavit and her counsel is also not present, this Court in order to meet the end of justice would remit the matter back to the Collector of the district who after issuing notice to the respondent no.7 as also the representative of the Gram Sabha would pass a final order after also extending opportunity of hearing to them with regard to selection and appointment of the respondent no.7 in the light of the eligibility and condition fixed in the circular of the State Government. Such an exercise must be completed by the Collector of the district within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order along with a fresh representation of the petitioner with full detail therein. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)