IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3238 of 2008 (1) Neelam Kumari @ Neelam Devi, wife of Shri Yadunandan Prasad, village Lautan, (2) Munni Kumari, wife of Shri Sanjay Paswan, village Khaspatti Yadunathpur, both within Sakra PS, district Muzaffarpur – Petitioners. Vs. (1) The State of Bihar through Secretary, Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna. (2) Dist. Magistrate, Muzaffarpur. (3) Dist. Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur. (4) Dy. Dev. Commissioner, Muzaffarpur. (5) Child Dev. Project Officer, Muraul, Dist. Muzaffarpur – Respondents. 3 28.4.2011 The petitioners have challenged the order issued vide memo no. 780, dated 20.12.2007 passed by the District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur cancelling the selection as Aanganbari Sevika. The petitioners were appointed on the basis of the fact that they had passed their Prathma examination held by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag in the year 1987. It was held by the Aam Sabha that the petitioners had the qualification of being matriculate and as such were given the said appointments. On behalf of the State it has been contended that the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag is not recognized by the State of Bihar. This issue has been the subject matter of several writ petitions wherein the incumbents were either dismissed from service because they had the said qualification or because of the fact that some of them come to this court claiming that they had the required qualification and had to be considered for appointment on the basis of the qualification and certificates which they had. This court in the case of State of Bihar vs. Mamta 2 Kumari reported in 2010 (1) PLJR 318 has held that the State Government has not recognized the said institution. In fact at paragraph 13 of the judgment it has specifically been stated that in Article 358 of the Bihar Education code the names of Hindi Vishwa Vidalya, Allahabad and Prayag Mahila Mahavidyalya, Allahamad did not find place. There is no institution therein by the name of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad. Considering the decision of this court in the aforesaid case, this court cannot interfere with the impugned order. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)