IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8768 of 2008 SUNITA DEVI, WIFE OF SURENDRA YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHALUA, POLICE STATION DOBHI, DISTRICT GAYA …………………………PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GAYA 3. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER, GAYA 4. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, DOBHI, GAYA 5. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT BARI, PRAKHAND DOBHI, DISTRICT GAYA …………………………………………………………………………..RESPONDENTS ***** 2 17/05/2011 The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure-8 passed by the District Magistrate, Gaya. The engagement of the petitioner as an Aanganbari Sevika has been declared to be irregularly made, in view of the fact, that according to the mapping area, the majority population of the centre is from the Schedule Caste community. The petitioner belongs to the backward class community. The candidature of the Schedule Caste candidate was rejected on the ground that her husband was working as a Daily Wage Earner in the Department of Minor Irrigation. The report of the Child Development Project Officer indicates that the husband of Rohini Devi was a Daily Wage Earner and his services were terminated in the year 1993. It has been reported by the Child Development Project Officer that the State Government is considering the appointment of these terminated Daily Wage Earners. At present, the husband of Rohini Devi has not been 2 regularized in the Minor Irrigation Department. He is also not working as a Daily Wage Earner in the Department, and as such, it cannot be said that Rohini Devi should be deprived on this account. However, there can be no doubt of the fact that in case the husband of the petitioner is absorbed, she would not be entitled to hold the post. I find no illegality in the order of the District Magistrate, Gaya. This writ application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)