IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.742 of 2009 PRIYANJANA KUMARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 27.06.2011 A prayer was made for a pass over in the pre lunch session on behalf of the petitioner. When the matter has been called out in the post lunch session no one appears on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 6.11.2007 of the District Magistrate in Case No. 105/2007 upheld on 2.8.2008 by the Commissioner Patna Division in Misc. Appeal No. 628 of 2007.The impugned order terminates the services of the petitioner from the post of Anganwari Sevika. The District Magistrate noticing that the petitioner had lesser marks than one Sushila Devi opined that the records do not reflect status of the dominant caste to justify the selection. Likewise the Appellate Authority was satisfied that the Mapping Register with regard to the status of the dominant caste was not prepared in accordance with law. It appears that the District Magistrate had noticed that the primary challenge was on the ground that the husband of the petitioner was in government service and therefore she was not eligible for appointment. That question appears to have been left undecided by both the authorities. There is no pleading in the writ application that husband of the petitioner was not in government service. Whether Mapping Register was prepared in accordance with law, which was the dominant cast in the area, are all questions of fact. If two authorities were satisfied that the Mapping Register was not prepared in accordance with law there is no occasion for this Court to interfere on this question of fact. Needless to state that in the fresh advertisement issued the petitioner shall equally be eligible to apply and be considered in accordance with law. The writ application stands dismissed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)