IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6999 of 2007 RAJESHWARI KUMARI, wife of Satyendra Kumar, Resident of Village Vaishali (Tola Chainpur), Police Station Vaishali and District Vaishali …. Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. District Magistrate, Vaishali 3. Child Development Project Officer, Block- Vaishali, District Vaishali. 4. Mukhiya Gram Panchayat- Vaishali, District Vaishali 5. Panchayat Sachiv, Gram Panchayat Vaishali, District Vaishali. 6. Jaiwati Devi, wife of Ramprit Rai, Resident of Village Vaishali, Police Station Vaishali and District Vaishali. … Respondents ----------- 2. 26.11.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “(1) That this writ application is being filed for directing the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sevika of village Vaishali (Tola Chainpur) in District Vaishali and for all consequential reliefs to which the petitioner is found entitled during course of hearing of this writ application.” With reference to the aforementioned reliefs, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was more qualified as against respondent no. 6. 2 Counsel for the petitioner however would admit that the petitioner as against aforementioned selection and appointment of respondent no. 6 on the post of Anganwari Sevika had not moved before the Prescribed Authority under the Government Circular. That being so, this writ application in terms of Government circular which provides for redressal of such grievance through an enquiry to be made by the Collector of the district and also a forum of appeal by the Commissioner of the Division against such order passed by the Collector, was/is premature. This court thus while dismissing the writ application would give liberty to the petitioner to exhaust her internal remedy as provided under the Government Circular. It is, however, made clear that as this writ application had remained pending before this court for a period of two and a half years if the petitioner would file any such representation to the Collector within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, her case may not be rejected 3 on the ground of delay or any limitation and the grievance raised by the petitioner would receive attention of the Collector on its own merits. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this writ application is dismissed. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)