IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8818 of 2007 NISHA SINGH, wife of Sautam Kumar Singh, resident of village Kalyanpur (Bhuska), P.S. Kahalgaon, District Bhagalpur … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur 2. The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur 3. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Lagma Block, Khalgaon, District Bhagalpur … Respondents. ----------- 2. 27.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The prayer in this writ application of the petitioner reads as follows: “This is an application for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash Memo No. 1186 dated 4th of June, 2007, as issued under the signature of the District Magistrate, Bhagalpur to the extent, the petitioner is concerned, whereby and whereunder it has been laid down that the eligibility criteria which has been adhered to while making payment of Panchayat teachers of the Elementary School was also to be made applicable for appointment of Sewikas and Sahayikas and by that virtue, the certificate of the petitioner so being granted by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Allahabad was not recognized and thus petitioner’s selection for appointment to the post of Sahayika 2 has been annulled and further for issuance of consequential writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to join the post Anganwadi Sewika at Kalyanpur (Bhuska) Harijan Tola for which she has been selected after due selection process and further for issuance of any other appropriate writ or writs, orders or direction to which the petitioner may be found legally entitled to.” Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, with reference to the aforementioned relief would submit that there is apparent error in the order passed by the Collector of Bhagalpur district, inasmuch as the educational qualification acquired by the petitioner from Hindi Sahitya Siksha Sammelan, Allahabad was to be given equivalence of matriculation in terms of the decision of the Central Government and the State Government. In the opinion of this Court since the impugned order of the Collector is appealable, the petitioner in stead of 3 rushing to this Court ought to have exhausted her alternative remedy. That being so, this application is premature and is accordingly dismissed with the liberty to the petitioner to file her appeal before the Commissioner of the Division within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order and in the event such an appeal is filed by the petitioner in the aforementioned period the same will be disposed of on merits without circumscribing the petitioner by the period of limitation, inasmuch as this writ application, though misconceived, has remained pending for a period of almost 2½ years. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/