IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4531 of 2005 SUNAINA KUMARI, WIFE OF LATE NAKUL KUMAR MANDAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST – PAWAI, P.S. – AMARPUR, DISTRICT – BANKA. ……. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BANKA. 3. THE DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, BANKA. 4. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, PAWAI, BANKA. 5. THE MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT PAWAI, DISTRICT – BANKA. 6. SUNITA KUMARI, WIFE OF MANOJ MANDAL (WARD MEMBER OF WARD NO. 6 OF GRAM PANCHAYAT PAWAI), RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. PAWAI, P.S. AMARPUR, DISTRICT – BANKA. ……….. RESPONDENTS. ----------- 04/ 26.04.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner, the State and Respondent No.6. Petitioner has challenged the selection of Respondent No. 6 on the post of Anganwari Sevika for Ward No. 6 under Pawai Gram Panchayat of Amarpur Block of district Banka, on the ground that Respondent No. 6 being the wife of Ward Member should not have been selected for the post of Anganwari Sevika, since she should have been disqualified for this reason only. Facts as stated in the writ application disclose that both petitioner as well as Respondent No. 6 belonged to the category of most backward caste and in this regard both had submitted caste certificate along with their application before the 2 Ama Sabha of the Gram Panchayat. Selection process for the post of Anganwari Sevika for Ward No. 6 of village Pawai under Gram Panchayat Pawai was initiated by the Ama Sabha of concerned Gram Panchayat. Besides the petitioner and Respondent No. 6 other applicants had also filed their application but the Respondent No. 6 was selected as she was found to be most suitable candidate for the post. The reason as disclosed in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent No. 4 is that Respondent No. 6 had higher qualification of Intermediate, while the petitioner was Matriculate. Another reason is that petitioner was not permanent resident of the same Ward for which selection was to be made. The guideline for selection of Anganwari Sevika indicates that the applicant must the daughter-in-law of that village and also permanent resident of the same place. The guideline also indicates that if two candidates of the beneficiary group are available for the post, candidate having higher qualification must be selected. Respondent No. 6 was selected in the Ama Sabha of concerned Gram Panchayat for these 3 reasons. Accordingly, I do not find that any illegality was committed while selecting Respondent No. 6 on the post of Anganwari Sevika. There is no merit in this application. It is dismissed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)