IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13007 of 2009 SMT.MINTU KUMARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 9.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The services of the petitioner as an Aganbari Sevika have been terminated by an order dated 14.8.2009 on the charge that the centre was to remain open for distribution from 9.00 A.M. to 1.00 P.M. An inspection at 11.10 A.M. revealed that the petitioner had not kept the centre open but it was closed. The petitioner in her representation dated 22.8.2009 has herself admitted that the centre was closed on the concerned date at 11.00 A.M. but sought to explain the same. Once the charge is admitted, if the petitioner is aggrieved, her remedy lies in an appeal against the order of the District Programme Officer before the District Magistrate where her explanation can be properly considered. The writ application is disposed with direction to the petitioner that if so advised, she may prefer an appeal before the District Magistrate, the competent authority under the rules regulating service conditions Anganbari Sevika of the year 2006 as amended in 2008. If the petitioner prefers such appeal within one month from today the District Magistrate shall consider and 2 decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law within a maximum period of two months from today by a reasoned and speaking order, without going into issues of limitation. The writ application stands disposed off. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)