IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8575 of 2007 MANILA DEVI, W/o Dayal Shankar, resident of village Kasawa (Kapoor Pakari), P.S. Sikarganj, District East Champaran … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari 3. Child Development Project Officer, Chiraiya, East Champaran 4. Smt. Ram Prabha Devi, Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Kapoor Pakari, Block Chiraiya, District East Champaran 5. Malti Devi, wife of Ravi Shankar Prasad, Resident of village Kasawa (Kapoor Pakari), P.S. Sikarganj, District East Champaran … Respondents. ----------- 2. 27.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: “The petitioner prays for issuance of appropriate writ of mandamus/ order/ direction to the respondents authorities to get enquire the matter about the illegal appointment on the basis of forged and fabricated document as Sewika of respondent no.5 namely Malti Devi at the Anganbari Centre No. 11 bearing Code No. 182. The petitioner further prays to terminate the appointment of the private respondent no.5 and issue appointment letter in favour of the petitioner who is the next to be appointed according to the merit lit who has debarred due to the 2 illegal appointment of respondent no.5.” Mr. Sarvadeo Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the aforementioned prayer would submit that the limited enquiry that was sought to be made either by the Collector of the District or In-charge Child Development Project Officer was with regard to genuineness of the marks sheet produced by private respondent no.5 and this exercise has not been completed by the concerned official respondents till date. He would also refer to certain inter departmental communication before the C.D.P.O. and the Secretary of Bihar Sanskrit Siksha Board to show that the correct answer is not being given to the query made with regard to educational qualification/ marks obtained by the private respondent no.5. In the opinion of this Court the Collector of the District being the prescribed authority to look into the grievance relating to selection/ appointment on the post of Anganwari Sevika, cannot close his eyes towards apparent discrepancies if alleged by an unsuccessful 3 Surendra/ candidate. Such representation in fact ought to have been decided by the Collector by directing private respondent no.5 to produce the original and if necessary such original produced by respondent no.5 ought to have been sent for cross-check/ verification by the competent authority of the Bihar Sanskrit Siksha Board. That being so, this Court would direct the Collector of East Champaran District to look into the grievance of the petitioner as raised by her in her two representations dated 1.6.2007 and 28.6.2007, as contained in Annexures 5 and 7 and take a final decision by passing a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, respondent no.5 as also the concerned representative of Gram Panchayat within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observation, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) 4