IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.926 of 2005 Mantu Kumari, Wife of Sri Satish Kumar @ Satish Kumar Vadelkar @ Satish Prasad, Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, P.O. Parasdiha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. ……………..Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The District Magistrate, Nalanda. 3. The District Welfare Officer, Nalanda. 4. Bal Vikash Pariyojana Padadhikari, Chandi District Nalanda. 5. Sri Ghan Shyam Prasad Mukhiya, Mahkar Gram Panchayat, Resident of Village Gauri, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 6. Smt Lata Devi Up-Mukhiya Mahkar Gram Panchayat Resident of Village Araisa, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 7. Smt. Manju Devi Wife of Sri Ashok Kumar Resident of Village Dariapur, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 8. Sri Bechan Prasad Son of Late Tuklal Mahton Resident of Village Mahkar Dih, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 9. Smt Kanchan Devi Wife of Sri Pramod Kumar Resident of Village Sinduara, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 10. Smt. Shakuntala Devi Wife of Sri Jeevan Paswan, Resident of Village Sinduara, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 11. Smt Shanju Kumari Wife of Sri Sarvesh Prasad Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalalnda. 12. Sri Amrak Chaudhary Son of Late Babu Lal Chaudhary, Resident of Village Mahkar Dih Police station Chandi, District Nalanda. 13. Smt. Sanju Devi Wife of Sri Munna Paswan, Resident of Village Dariapur, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. (From Serial No. 7 to 13 all are Ward Members.) 14. Smt. Kanak Lata Devi Wife of Sri Ram Kishore Paswan, Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 15. Smt. Chanda Kumari Wife of Sri Hari Narayan Prasad, Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 16. Smt. Ranju Kumari Wife of Sri Shashi Kant Kumar, Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 17. Smt. Indu Kumari Wife of Sri Harendra Kumar Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 18. Smt. Indu Devi Wife of Sri Uday Prasad Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. (From Serial No. 14 to 18 all are candidates for Sevika Agan Bari Kendra Mahkar Bigha, Am Sabha dated 12.08.2004). 2 19. Most Sobha Wife of Late Binod Paswan Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. 20. Smt. Indu Kumari Wife of Sri Kumar Lokesh Sinha, Resident of Village Mahkar Bigha, Police Station Chandi, District Nalanda. (Candidates for Sevika in Am Sabha dated 26.10.2002). …….…..Respondents ----------- 5 12.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1. That the Present Writ Petition is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order or orders, direction or directions to the respondents as to why the order Contained in „Annexure-12‟ letter No. 952 (K) dated 9th of October, 2004 issued by the District Welfare Officer, Nalanda (Respondent No.3) to Bal Vikash Priyojana Padadhikari, Chandi, Nalanda (Respondent No.4) directing him to issue Selection letter for SEVIKA AGANBARI Kendra Mahkar Bigha in favour of Chandu Kumari (Respondent No.15) and „Annexure-13‟ Letter No. 575 dated 9th of October, 2004 issuedby Bal Vikash Pariyojana Padadhikari Chandi, Nalanda (Respondent no.4) appointing Chandu Kumari (Respondent No.15) as Sevika Aganbari Kendra Mahkar Bigha, be not called for and after hearing the parties be pleased to quash the same.” With reference to the aforementioned relief, counsel for the petitioner would submit that the appointment of the respondent 3 no.15 with which the petitioner is directly concerned is not sustainable, inasmuch as, the appointment was never made in terms of any decision taken by the Aam Sabha. Counsel for the State, however, is not in a position to deny this fact, inasmuch as, even his document containing the report of the Collector of Nalanda district dated 29.7.2005 proceeds on an assumption that the then District Welfare Officer, Ramnath Prasad had got the appointment of the respondent no.15 made, without there being any recommendation of Aam Sabha for her selection and appointment for the post of Anganbari Sevika. Though the private respondent no.15 after receiving the notice of this case had entered her appearance through her counsel but she has neither filed any counter affidavit denying the fact as stated in the writ application relating to her selection/appointment nor even her counsel is present to explain the said allegation. In that view of the matter, since the power of enquiry into selection/appointment and a final decision thereon in such matter is 4 vested in the Collector of the district, this Court would direct the Collector of the Nalanda district to decide the matter as with regard to the eligibility, authenticity and correctness of the appointment of the private respondent no.15. In the event, it is found that the private respondent no.15 was appointed without there being any recommendation of the Gram Panchyat in her favour, her appointment would definitely be cancelled by directing the Gram Panchayat to reconsider the matter afresh. As the right of the petitioner vis-à-vis respondent no.15 will have to be adjudicated by the Collector, it goes without saying that he will decide the issue only after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, the respondent no.15 and the representative of the Gram Sabha. As the matter is pending before this Court for almost more than four years and this Court, in absence of respondent no.15, is not in a position to decide the matter effectively, it would direct the Collector of the district to decide the matter within a period of six months from the date of 5 receipt/production of a copy of this order. The petitioner if so advised may produce this order along with a fresh representation addressed to the Collector of Nalanda district wherein he may synchronize all the alleged infirmities in the selection/appointment of the respondent no.15 at one place and the Collector of the district will dispose of such representation by a speaking order ofcourse after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and Respondent no. 15. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)