IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6334 of 2009 DEVENTI DEVI @ DEVENTI KUMARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 20.5.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed by the District Programme Officer cancelling the selection of the petitioner on the ground that she had obtained lesser marks than one Lalita Kumari. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the District Programme Officer has no authority to pass such an order in terms of guideline issued by the Government which vests power of removal from the post of Anganwari Sevika only in the Collector of the district. Counsel for the State, on the other hand, would submit that the District Programme Officer has now been delegated such power and in fact is part and parcel of the office of the Collector, as would appear from the impugned order. This Court for the time being would not like to go into these aspects because this case even otherwise in absence of 2 Lalita Kumari cannot be decided. Since Lalita Kumari has not been added to this writ application, this Court in stead of dismissing the writ application on the ground of non-joinder of party would direct the petitioner to file a self contained representation to the Collector of the District highlighting each and every issue and if such a representation is filed by the petitioner, the Collector of the District after issuing notice and hearing the concerned parties including the petitioner and Lalita Kumari, would pass a final order within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Let it be made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and therefore, the Collector should pass an order strictly in accordance with law. With the aforementioned observation/direction this application stands finally disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/