IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13097 of 2003 1. SMT.REKHA KUMARI w/o Sri Ram Bijay Yadav resident of village: at/P.O.-Gajapatti, P.S. Hasanpur, District Samastipur. 2. Smt. Usha Kumari, w/o Sri Pulkit Prasad singh, r/o at & P. O. Ahilbar, P. S. Hasanpur, District Samastipur. 3. Smt. Premlata Kumari w/o Sri Umesh Paswan, r/o village- Vaida, P. O. Ahilbar, P. S. Basanpur, District Samastipur. 4. Smt. Anita Kumari w/o Sri Dinesh Rajak, r/o village- Shankarpur, P. O.- Gajapatti, P. S. Hasanpur, District- Samastipur. … Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Samastipur 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Rosera, District Samastipur. 5. The Child Development Project Officer, Hasanpur Block, District- Samastipur. 6. The Block Development Officer, Hasanpur Block, District Samastipur. 7. Smt. Anita Rai, w/0 Sri Hareram Yadav, r/o village- Shankarpur, P. O. Gajapatti, P. S. Hasanpur, Distt. Samastipur. 8. Smt. Veena Devi w/o Sri Ram Bharosa Ram r/o village- Bagaraha, Ahilwar, P. S.- Hasanpur, District Samastipur. 9. Smt. Rinku Devi, w/o Sri Baham Rajak, r/o village Shankarpur, P. O. Gajipatti, P.S.- Hasanpur. 10.Smt. Prem Lata Sinha, w/o Vijay Kumar Singh, r/o at & P.O. Ahilwar, Tolla Girdharpur, P.S.- Hasanpur Road, Distt. Samastipur. … Respondents. ----------- 8. 12.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners, counsel for the State as also counsel for private respondents. Prayer made in this writ application of the petitioner reads as follows:- a) For an appropriate direction to respondents to produce the appointment letters of respondent no. 7, 8 and 9 before this Hon’ble Court and accordingly quash the same. 2 b) For an appropriate directions to respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sevika/ Sahayika at centre no. 4, 8, 7 and 2 respectively in Ahilwar Panchayat, Hasanpur Block, District Samastipur and accordingly sent them for an appropriate training. c) For an appropriate direction to respondent authorities, especially respondent no. 3, 4 and 6 to produce the record of enquiry which has been initiated in illegal appointment of respondent no. 7, 8 and 9 as per the direction of the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Samastipur vide letter no. 532 dated 15.9.2003. d) For an appropriate direction to respondent authorities to take legal action against respondent no. 5, who has appointed respondent no. 7, 8 and 9 illegally.” With reference to the aforementioned reliefs, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that official respondents have not performed their duty in looking into the grievance of the petitioners inasmuch as the petitioners being better qualified and better suited for the posts of Anganbari Sivika as against private respondent nos. 7 to 10 were illegally sidelined and ignored in such 3 selection and appointment. On the other hand, counsel appearing for the private respondents has submitted that the issue as to the better suited or better qualified has to be gone into by the Gram Sabha, being the repository of the power of local self Government vested in the Gram Panchayat. He would therefore submit that the only thing which the prescribed authority including District Collector can do is to find out whether such appointment was made as per the policy and guidelines issued by the State Government and in the event it is found that such appointment was not in accordance with instructions issued by the State Government from time to time, it can remit the matter back to Gram Sabha for its reconsideration. In the opinion of this court, two things have always to be kept in mind while deciding the cases relating to appointment of Anganwari Sevika/Sahayika. The first, that such appointment has to be made as per the circular of the State Government and amongst the people who are below the poverty line. It is not a beneficiary scheme for well-to do 4 people and therefore irrespective of the fact as to the better qualified, the criteria made by the State Government in the circular has to be strictly followed. Second and yet most important aspect is that true it is Gram Sabha has been vested power to make such selection and appointment but then the District administration including Block Development Officer or Sub divisional Officer who under 2003 circular had been vested with power to hold enquiry and report the matter to the Collector whereafter the Collector had to take his final decision. In the subsequent circular of the year 2006, the power of such action with regard to selection/ appointment though still vested in Gram Sabha but then Supervisory control for finding out any illegality or inconformity is in the hands of Collector. There is also a forum of appeal against such decision of the Collector before the Commissioner of Division. In such manner, the screening of the decisions of Gram Sabha has to be made by the district administration. In the present case, it has come on record that the Commissioner, Darbhanga 5 Division, Samastipur vide letter no. 532 dated 15.9.2003 had initiated enquiry and as per submission of learned counsel for the petitioners a report was also submitted in favour of the petitioners and as against private respondents and yet no action was taken. If that be correct the district Collector was no longer required to look into the matter. Today however none of the parties are aware of the latest position. The matter has remained subjudice for almost six years before this Court. In that view of the matter, this court would direct the District Collector to look into all the aspects of the matter relating to appointment on the post of Anganbari Sevika as with regard to the claim of petitioners vis-a-vis private respondents. Such exercise must be completed by the Collector of the District within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The Collector, Samastipur while deciding the matter must apply himself to the relevant circular which was enforce at the time of selection/appointment of Anganbari Sevika of 6 the petitioner and private respondents. With the aforementioned observations and directions this writ application is disposed of. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)