IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7072 of 2011 1. Poonam Kumari W/o Shri Nandeshwar Narayan R/o Mohalla- muslim Tola, Majhaulia Road, PS- Kaji mohammadpur, Distt- Muzaffarpur 2. Tara Kumari W/o Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh R/o C/o Ramashish Pawan, Mohalla- Mithaanpura, jagdishpur, PS- Mithanpura, Distt- Muzaffarpur 3. Munni Kumari D/o late Sunil Kumar Jha, R/o Pankha Tola, PS- Kaji Mohammadpur, Distt- Muzaffarpur 4. Reena Kumari W/o Ram Krishna Sharma, R/o C/o Anil Kumar Mohalla- Brahmpura, Sonarpatti, Ekbal Hasan Path, PS- Brahmpura, Distt- Muzaffarpur 5. Krishna Kumari D/o late Deoki Lal Singh, R/o Mohalla- Chhitrauli, PS- Maniyari, Kudhni, Distt- Muzaffarpur 6. Bibha Kumari W/o Shri Sunil Kumar, R/o Chandrahati West PS- Kudhni Turki, Distt- Muzaffarpur 7. Chandralekha Kumari S/o Shri Kapildeo Narayan Sharma R/o Harishankar Maniyari PS- Maniyari Kudhni, Diss.- Muzaffarpur.- -----------------------------------------------------------Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secy. Social Welfare Depatt, Bihar, Patna 2. The secretary, Social Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna 3. The D.M.-cum-Chairman, Selection Committee, Muzaffarpur 4. The District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur 5. the CDPO, Musahari Sadar Block Muzaffarpur 6. The CDPO, Kudhani Block, Distt.- Muzaffarpur------------------- -----------------------------------------------Respondents ---------------------------------- 3 20.10.2011 On 8th August, 2011 this writ petition was adjourned giving liberty to respondent State authority to file counter affidavit indicating as to under what authority they can rake up the issue now of engagement of these petitioners as Anganbari Sewika below the age of 18 years, at the stage, when they have worked in that capacity for the last 26 years. This specious plea has been raised when they asserted their right for consideration for selection on the post of lady supervisor. The silence of the State does not help the situation in any manner. However one thing can be categorically recorded that the respondents are now raising such issue of disqualification of these 2 petitioners at much belated stage and not raised when they were engaged by them as Anganbari Sewikas 26 years ago. If they have allowed these petitioners to work as Anganbari Sewikas as these years the petitioners cannot be prevented from the zone of consideration merely because they are looking for an avenue of higher responsibility. The State will not be permitted to oust these petitioners from the zone of consideration on the specious ground that on their initial appointment they were less than 18 years of age. The conduct of the State by itself appears to be unreasonable and they are barred from raising an objection of the kind by their own conduct. This writ petitioner is disposed of with a clear direction upon the respondents concerned that none of the candidates of such kind including these petitioners would be kept out from the zone of consideration merely on the ground that when they were initially engaged they were less than 18 years of age. Petitioners’ claim will be considered irrespective of such objection raised by the authority with regard to the said selection. This writ application is allowed with the above direction. RPS ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)