IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4268 of 2010 1. SMT. SARITA SUMAN W/O UMESH PRASAD R/O VILL.- VISHANPUR BAKHRI, P.O.- BASANTPUR BAKHRI, P.S.- SAKRA, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MUZAFFARPUR 3. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MURAUL, MUZAFFARPUR 4. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER MURAUL, MUZAFFARPUR 5. THE DISTRICT PROGRAM OFFICER MUZAFFARPUR 6. THE MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ VISHANPUR BAKHRI, VILL.- VISHANPUR BAKHRI, P.S.- SAKRA, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR 7. THE SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ VISHANPUR BAKHRI P.S.- SAKRA, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR 8. SMT. RANJAN KUMARI W/O MAHESH SINGH VILL.- VISHANPUR BAKHRI, P.O.- BASANTPUR BAKHRI, P.S.- SAKRA, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Niraj Kumar, Adv. For the State:- Mr. Ritesh Kumar, A.C. to A.A.G.-1 ----------- 2. 5.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner questions the appointment of respondent no. 8 as Aganwari Sewika in preference to her on the allegation that the respondent secured appointment on fake and fabricated certificates. The petitioner claims her educational qualification for appointment from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Allahabad. In view of the decision of this Court in L.P.A. No. 28 of 2010, that the qualification from the aforesaid institution was not 2 recognized by the State Government, the claim of the petitioner does not stand to test. The writ petition is dismissed to that extent. But if the petitioner has represented before the District Magistrate that the respondent no. 8 had secured appointment on fake and fabricated certificates, and once the attention of the District Magistrate has been invited to that fact, he is naturally required to decide that issue in accordance with law after hearing all concerned including respondent no. 8, within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)