IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5157 of 2010 1. SMT.RANJAN KUMARI W/O SRI RANJEET RAM R/O VILL GAUSPUR, WARD NO.7, P.S.RAJA PAKAR, DISTT-VAISHALI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR , THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE COMMISSIONER TIRHUT DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR 3. THE COLLECTOR VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR 4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER MAHUA, HAJIPUR(VAISHALI) 5. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER MAHUA, HAJIPUR(VAISHALI) 6. SMT. ANITA KUMARI W/O SRI MANOJ KUMAR JHA R/O VILL GAUSPUR, WARD NO.6, P.S.RAJA PAKAR, DISTT-VAISHALI ----------- 3. 30.07.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the State and the learned Counsel for private respondent no. 6. Counsel for the State and the private respondent no. 6 very fairly submit that they are not in a position to demonstrate from the records that the appellate authority, the Commissioner, in the appeal preferred by respondent no. 6 issued notice to the petitioner with opportunity to defend and after hearing her passed the impugned order. It is the case of the petitioner that no notice was issued to her in the appeal nor was she impleaded as a party respondent. The appellate order of the Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur in Service Appeal No. 43 of 2009 preferred by respondent no. 6 dated 19.1.2010 is accordingly set aside. The appeal is remanded to the Commissioner to hear the petitioner, respondent no. 6 and others concerned and pass a fresh reasons and speaking order in accordance with law. It would be open for the petitioner and respondent no. 6 to seek interim relief before the Commissioner if so advised. The writ application stands allowed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)