LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.10 OF 2007 (Against the order dated 14.11.2006 passed in CWJC No. 1677 of 2005) MEENA DEVI @ MEENA KUMARI, W/o Sri Rajiv Kumar Mishra, resident of village-Brahampur, P.S. Baunsi, District- Banka ………….. Respondent/Appellant Versus 1. RANJANA ROY W/o Sri Mathura Yadav, resident of village- Brahampur, P.S. Bounsi, District- Banka ……………..Petitioner/Respondent 2. The State of Bihar 3. Director, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. Collector, Banka. 5. Deputy Development Commissioner, Banka 6. Child Development Project Officer, Bounsi, Banka. 7. Block Development Officer, Bounsi, Banka. ………….. …….. Respondents/Respondents For the Appellant : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Balram Kapri, Advocate For the State: Mr. Shashi Shekhar Pd. Sinha Asstt. Counsel to G.P.IX P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Shiva Kirti Singh & Hemant Kumar Srivastava,JJ Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the state. 2. In spite of valid service of notice by registered cover, the private respondent has chosen not to appear and contest this appeal. 3. The appellant is aggrieved by judgment and 2 order dated 14.11.2006 whereby A Single Judge of this court has allowed the writ petition preferred by respondent No. 1 and has directed to shift Anganwadi Center from village- Brahmpur, P.S. Baunsi, District-Banka to any other appropriate place where the majority of the population may be of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or Extremely backward class or minority communities. The appellant was appointed as Anganwadi Sahayeeka of that center and although her appointment was not interfered with for lack of necessary information, she is aggrieved by the order of the writ court on the ground that the order under appeal is based upon an incorrect interpretation of Govt. Circular dated 13th June, 1998. 4. Facts are not in dispute and the issue involved is purely one of law. The relevant circular issued by the Government of Bihar, Department of Welfare dated 13th June, 1998, has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the Memo of Appeal. The fate of the appeal depends upon the interpretation of Paragraph-2 of the aforesaid circular. The said paragraph runs as follows: eSfiax dk;Z iwjk djus ds ckn cky fodkl ifj;kstuk inkf/kdkjh ,oa efgyk i;Zosf{kdk;sa xzkeh.k izfrfuf/k;ksa/usrkvksa [foystVillage) yhMlZ] ls lEidZ djsaxs rFkk ;g fu/kkZfjr djsaxs fd fdl&fdl xkWao esa vkWaxuckM`h dsUnz LFkkfir fd;s tk;sa rFkk fdl dsUnz ds lsok {ks= esa dkSu&dkSu ls xkWao/Vksys gksaxs vkSj ml dsUnz ls ykHkkfUor dkSu gksaxs A xjhch js[kk ds uhps thou clj djus okys lekt ds vR;Ur detksj oxZ ds yksx bl dk;Zdze ds vUrxZr ykHkkFkhZ dh lwph esa vk;saxs A 3 ijUrq] vkaxuckM`h dsUnz eq[;r% mUgha xkWaoksa/Vksyksa esa j[ks tk;sa tgkWa vuqlwfpr tkfr/vuqlwfpr tutkfr/vR;Ur fiNM`k oxZ/fiNM`k oxZ/vYila[;d oxZ ds yksxksa dk ckgqY; gks A bl izdkj p;fur vkaxuckM`h dsUnzksa dh lwph vkSj lsok {ks= rFkk ykHkkfUorksa ds czsdvi dks iapk;r lfefr ls vuqeksfnr djk fy;k tk; A 5. In the aforesaid paragraph, the circular points out as to who shall be beneficiaries of the scheme under which Anganwadi centers are to be established. Thereafter, it provides that such centers shall mainly be located in those villages/TOLAs where members of scheduled caste/scheduled tribe/extremely backward class/backward class/minorities may be in majority. Learned writ court has interpreted the word “mainly” (eq[;r%) as an equivalent of the word “must” and on that basis, the aforesaid provision has been given a mandatory force requiring location of Anganwadi centers only in those villages and Tolas where the specified castes or class of people are in majority. 6. According to learned counsel for the appellant, the word (eq[;r%) would mean “generally” or” mainly” and, therefore, it does not debar the competent authority from locating the Anganwadi centres in other villages/Tolas provided such a decision has been taken after considering all the relevant facts. 7. On a careful perusal of the provision in Paragraph-2 of the circular, we find merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant. 8. Learned counsel for the state failed to point 4 out any provision or material which may warrant the interpretation as given by the learned Single Judge in the order under appeal. We are of the considered view that provision in the circular is directory in nature and no doubt, generally the Anganwadi centre should be located in the villages/Tolas where the members of scheduled caste/scheduled tribe/extremely backward class/backward class/minorities may be in majority but in appropriate circumstances, exceptions can be made. The word (eq[;r%) will mean “mainly” and not “must”. 9. In view of aforesaid discussions and findings, the appeal has to succeed. The order under appeal is set aside and the appeal is allowed. 10. There shall be no order as to costs. Patna High Court, Dated, the 12th day of August, 2010 NAFR/AKV (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)