IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10884 of 2007 PUNAM KUMARI, w/o Birendra Kumar, resident of village- Hira Kanhauli, P. S. Parsauni, District Sitamarhi… Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, Dist. Sitamarhi. 3. The District Welfare Officer Sitamarhi, Dist. Sitamarhi. 4. The Block Development Officer, Parsauni, Dist. Sitamarhi. 5. The Child Development Project Officer Parsauni, Dist. Sitamarhi. 6. The Secretary Parsauni Khirodhar Gram Panchayat Raj, P. S. Parsauni, Dist. Sitamarhi. 7. Sri Raghubir Sah, the Mukhiya Parsauni Khirodhar Gram Panchayat Raj, P. S. Parsauni, Dist. Sitamarhi. 8. Sarita Saroj w/o Anik Kumar Nirala, resident of village- Hira Kanhauli, P.S. Parsauni, Dist. Sitamarhi. … Respondents. ----------- 3. 17.12.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the State as also counsel for respondent no.8. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1. That this writ application is being filed on behalf of the petitioner above named for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding to the respondent’s authority to consider the case of the petitioner as an Anganwari Sevika in place of respondent no. 8 who has been selected as Anganwari Sevika by the respondent’s authority ignoring the case of the petitioner though the petitioner has got higher marks to the respondent no. 8, and for any other appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders as 2 this Hon’ble Court thinks fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.” Counsel for the petitioner while assailing the selection of respondent no. 8 has confined his submission only on the comparative higher marks of the petitioner vis a vis. respondent no. 8. Admittedly, the petitioner had remedy to get this question of facts solved before the Collector of the District who is the Prescribed Authority under the circular issued by the State Government. That being so, the petitioner is given liberty to file a compact representation wherein she may assail the selection and appointment of respondent no. 8 only on the question of marks as raised in this writ application before the Collector of the district who thereafter would decide the matter in terms of guidelines and also in the time frame as now has been fixed in the Circular dated 10.12.2009 of course by a reasoned order and after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner, respondent no. 8 and representative of 3 concerned Gram Panchayat. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)