IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.7757 OF 2007 MANJU KUMARI, WIFE OF KRISHNADEO PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LODIPUR, POLICE STATION SHEIKHPURA, DISTRICT SHEIKHPURA VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SHEIKHPURA 3. THE DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, SHEIKHPURA 4. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, SHEIKHPURA 5. THE MUKHIYA, LODIPUR PANCHAYAT RAJ, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT SHEIKHPURA 6. PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ LODIPUR, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT SHEIKHPURA ………………………………………………………………………………RESPONDENTS ******* 2 23/04/2010 The petitioner was appointed vide Annexure-1 as Aanganbari Sevika, Lodipur (Mushahari Tola) within the block and district of Sheikhpura. The petitioner was not sent for training, and as such she filed a representation on 17.05.2007, to the Child Development Project Officer that she should be sent for training. Vide Annexure-4 dated 17.05.2007, the Child Development Project Officer on instructions of the District Welfare Officer vide his letter no. 109 dated 26.03.2007 has cancelled the appointment of the petitioner without giving any reason. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a complaint by a member of the Panchayat Samiti, namely, Sangeeta Kumari that the mapping of the village has been wrongly done and as such the appointment of the Aanganbari Sevika has also been wrongly made. This complaint was apparently filed on 2 26.03.2007 before the District Welfare Officer, Sheikhpura. This Court does not appreciate the fact that the appointments are cancelled without their being any proper enquiry. The Court does not mean to say that appointments should be made de hors the guidelines, if there are some defects which are to be removed by the Authorities of the district, they ought to have been removed forthwith. Keeping the appointments in abeyance because of a complaint filed by a member of the Panchayat Samiti which apparently could have been remedied immediately, this Court concludes that the District Welfare Officer for one reason for the other without considering the interest and the objects of the scheme for appointing Aanganbari Sevikas had scuttled the whole scheme for three years. The object of the scheme is to provide food and education to the extremely backward class of children and women which was left unattended. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the mapping has been completed and now fresh process of appointment of Aanganbari Sevika is to be initiated. In this case, there is no allegation that the petitioner does not possess the requisite qualification for being appointed as Aanganbari Sevika. The only aspect that remains to be examined is that whether the petitioner comes within the majority community as per the mapping of the centre in 3 question. The process should be completed within three months of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)