IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6267 of 2009 Bulbul Kumari, Daughter of Sri Shiv Kumar Yadav and Wife of Sri Arvind Yadav, Resident of Village and P.O. Haripur Kala, P.S. Murliganj, District Madhepura. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Principal Secretary, Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Madhepura, District Madhepura. 4. The District Welfare Officer, Madhepura, District Madhepura. 5. The Block Development Officer, Murliganj, District Madhepura. 6. The Child Development Project Officer, Murliganj, District Madhepura. 7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Haripur Kala, Block Murliganj, District Madhepura. 8. Smt. Bibha Kumari, Daughter of Sri Abhinandan Sah, Wife of Sri Ashok Sah, Resident of Village Haripur Kala, P.O. Murliganj, District Madhepura. ---------- Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner :- Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam For the State :- Mr. R.C.P. Bharti, SC-14 Mr. Ajay Kr. AC to SC-14 2 19.5.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application is that the respondent no.8 Smt. Bibha Kumari despite having obtained lesser marks than the petitioner has not only been appointed on the post of Anganwari Sevika but in fact even after being detected that the said Smt. Bibha Kumari was appointed on a forged mark-sheet, she has been still allowed to continue in service to the detriment of the 2 petitioner. Counsel for the State would point out that Smt. Bibha Kumari had not passed the matriculation examination rather from the records it would appear that Smt. Bibha Kumari had cleared one of the compartmental paper by appearing in a supplementary examination. Counsel, therefore, would contend that it is not a case of forged mark-sheet. In the opinion of this Court, it has always to be taken into account that whenever a selection is made, the best candidate from the category from which such appointment has to be made, must be appointed. If Smt. Bibha Kumari, after taking into account total marks secured by her, has a higher percentage as against the petitioner, she is definitely entitled to continue but then if it would appear that Smt. Bibha Kumari had not only tried to dupe the authorities by filing a forged mark-sheet but also suppressing the fact of her clearing compartmental examination and that her marks is still lesser than that of the petitioner, the authorities will owe a duty to ensure a fair selection by removing the said Bibha Kumari and 3 make a fresh selection after giving opportunity to all the eligible candidates. From the documents that have been annexed with this writ application, it appears that the matter as with regard to the filing of the alleged forged mark- sheet has been referred by the respondent authorities to the Bihar School Examination Board through the Child Development Project Officer, Murliganj (Respondent No.6) but the report of the Board has not been received as yet. Since the entire scheme in the district is functioning under the direct control of the Collector of the district and the Collector of the district even otherwise has a direct role in the matter of appointment and termination of service of Anganwari Sevika as per the Guidelines issued by the State Government in the year, 2006, this Court would direct the Collector of the Madhepura district to look into this aspect of the matter and take a final decision with regard to appointment and continuance of Bibha Kumari within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 4 In order to expedite the matter, the petitioner is directed to file a comprehensive detailed representation enclosing all the evidence and upon its receipt, the Collector will issue notice to the respondent no.8 and after hearing both of them as also other officials, and take his final decision within a period of four months from the date of filing of such representation. Let it be made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of claim of either the petitioner or respondent no.8 and therefore, it will be open for the Collector to take his own decision as with regard to the appointment on the post of Anganwari Sevika strictly in terms of the Guidelines and in accordance with law. With the aforementioned observations/ direction, this application is finally disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)