IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7317 of 2010 Akash Lata Pandey W/O Munna Tripathi R/O Vill Sarabali, P.O. +P.S.Karpi, Distt-Arwal(Bihar) Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Commissioner Magadh Division, Gaya 4. The District Magistrate Arwal, Distt-Arwal 5. The District Programme Officer Arwal ,Distt-Arwal 6. The Sub Divisional Officer Arwal, Distt-Arwal 7. The Child Development Project Officer Sone Bhadar, Banshi Surajpur, Block, Distt-Arwal 8. The Mukhiya Sherpur Gram Panchayat Sone Bhadar Banshi Surajpur, Block Distt-Arwal ------------------------ 03/ 28.09.2011 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Praful Kumar Jha, Assisting counsel to S.C. 3 for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order bearing Memo No. 78 dated 9.4.2010, passed by the Child Development Project Officer, Sonebhadra Banshi, Suryapur in the District of Arwal, whereby the Anganwari Centre, Sarabali Code No. 25 has been shifted in the house of one Sanjay Sharma, son of Ramnath Sharma on the request of the local villagers. Learned counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the guidelines issued by the Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar as contained in Memo No. 2733 dated 3.10.2006 issued under the signature of the Director, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, more particularly to paragraph 2(ii) (ka) thereof submits that the said provision in no uncertain terms 2 provides for setting up of an Anganwari Centre at a place where it caters to a large number of beneficiaries. Learned counsel submits that the guidelines further provides that if the Anganwari Centre does not have its own building then it can be established in the government school situated within the village or the tola or near the said school. The guidelines further provides that if the school is not available in the village then a certification to that effect may be obtained from the Block Development Officer for setting up an Anganwari Centre at a public place or a community hall/Panchayat Bhawan. The guidelines further clearly stipulates that it is only in circumstances where there is no community hall or a Panchayat Bhawan within the village or the tola and after the position is duly certified by the Block Development Officer, that it can be established in a private house. Learned counsel submits that the order shifting the Anganwari Centre as placed at Annexure-1 nowhere refers to any such eventuality and the non-availability of a community hall/Panchayat Bhawan within the village. It is stated that even in absence of proper certification in this regard by the Block Development Officer which is a prerequisite to establishment of an Anganbari Centre in a private house, the Child Development Project Officer Sonebhadra Banshi, Suryapur, district-Arwal in a unilateral manner, has passed the impugned order. He thus submits that the shifting of the Anganwari Centre being contrary to the guidelines set out by the Government in its Social Welfare Department, it cannot be permitted to run in a private house. 3 Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and considering the impugned order dated 9.4.2010 in the backdrop of the guidelines issued by the Social Welfare Department in its Memo No. 2733 dated 3.10.2006, it is manifest that no such eventuality has been mentioned in the order of the Child Development Project Officer, requiring the shifting of the Anganbari Centre in a private house. The writ petition is thus disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to represent his case before the respondent no. 5, the District Program Officer, Arwal to consider the decision of the Child Development Project Officer of shifting the Anganbari Centre in a private house in the light of the stipulations provided under paragraph 2 (ii) (ka) of the guidelines issued by the Social Welfare Department and to pass appropriate order for its establishment in a government school/community hall/Panchayat Bhawan situated within the village/tola of the petitioner as the case may be or in any other appropriate place with due certification of the Block Development Officer, as required under the guidelines. Any such representation filed by the petitioner before the respondent no. 5 shall be considered in the backdrop of the guidelines of the Social Welfare Department and shall be disposed of in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)