IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11382 of 2009 RENUKA SINGH, WIFE OF RAJDEO SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MEERAPUR (TOLE DEDAUL), P.S. SAKARA, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR---PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MUZAFFARPUR. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT RAJ OFFICER, MUZAFFARPUR. 4. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFICER, MUZAFARPUR. 5. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MURAUL, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR. 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MURAUL, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR. 7. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, MURAUL, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR. 8. THE MUKHIYA PANCHAYAT RAJ MEERAPUR, P.S. SAKARA, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR. 9. NUTAN KUMARI, WIFE OF ASHOK KUMAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MOHANPUR(TOLE DEDAUL), P.S. SAKARA, DISTRICT MUZAFFARPUR ---RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02. 04.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur bearing Memo No. 218 dated 24.3.2009, Annexure-12 whereunder appointment of the petitioner as Anganwari Sewika has been cancelled at the instance of private respondent no.9, Nutan Kumari who was also an applicant for the appointment on the post of Anganwari Sewika. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that her appointment has been cancelled with reference to the contents of Clauses 1(jha) and 6(vii)(kha) of the instructions issued by the Director, Social Welfare bearing letter No. 2783 dated 3.10.2006 but from close perusal of the order passed by the District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur, it is evident that reference of the two Clauses in Paragraph-5 of the impugned order is wholly bereft of the context as according to the impugned order the two Clauses referred to B.P.L. list, which is not to be found in Clauses 1(jha) and 6(vii)(kha) of the - 2 - letter of the Director bearing No. 2783 dated 3.10.2006. 4. Without going into the correctness or otherwise of the aforesaid submissions, I dispose of this writ application with direction to the petitioner to assail order dated 24.3.2009, Annexure-12 passed by the District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur as also signed by the Child Development Project Officer, Muraul before the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, who should consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate order as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt of the appeal/representation along with a copy of this order. Any appointment made, in the meanwhile on the post from which petitioner has been removed shall be subject to the result of the appeal/representation of the petitioner. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)