IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3875 of 2010 1. Lalit Ram S/O Late Shiv Nandan Ram R/O Vill.- Kuari Madan, P.S.- Mejarganj, Distt.- Sitamarhi Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Collector Sitamarhi, Distt.- Sitamarhi 3. The District Program Officer Sitamarhi 4. The Child Development Project Officer Mejarganj, Sitamarhi 5. Suresh Singh S/O Late Ram Ekwal Singh (Elected Mukhiya) R/O Vill.- Kuari Madan Gram Panchayat Raj Kuari Madan, P.S.- Mejarganj, Distt.- Sitamarhi 6. Urmila Devi W/O Suresh Ram Sewika Center No.4, Vill.- Kuari Madan, P.S.- Mejarganj, Distt.- Sitamarhi ----------- 2 29.06.2011 Heard Mr. Mahendra Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Fakruddin Ali Ahmad, learned Assistant Counsel to S.C-3 for the State. The writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the appointment of respondent No. 6 as Anganbari Sewika for the Anganbari Centre No. 4 under the Gram Panchyat Raj, Kuari Madan, Mejorganj Anchal, District Sitamarhi. The allegation against the respondent No. 6 is of not discharging the duties in the manner required of her as an Anganbari Sewika and that she has been distributing Ration in an irregular manner. Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to a report submitted by the Child Development Project Officer- Mejorganj, Sitamarhi placed at Annexure-3, submits that the recommendation was sufficient to substantiate the complaint made against the respondent No. 6 and sufficient for her removal. Learned counsel for the State submits that as the 2 enquiry spelt out in Annexure-3 of the writ petition was not complete, hence, the District Programme Officer, Sitamarhi conducted an independent enquiry and where upon it was found that not much of the allegation against the Anganbari Sewika (respondent No. 6) came to be true and that the person who were attached to the Kendra were getting their ration regularly without any complaint. The District Programme Officer vide his order contained in Annexure-3 to the Counter Affidavit bearing Memo No. 68 dated 16.1.2010 dismissed the complaint petition. It is also noted by the District Programme Officer that some dispute was running between Sukhari Ram and the Anganbari Sewika, respondent No. 6 and the complaint in question was an outcome of the same, being instituted by his supporters. Regard being had to the findings of the District Programme Officer placed at Annexure-3 to the Court Affidavit, I find no merit in this case. The writ petition is dismissed. Prakash ( Jyoti Saran, J.)