IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.14 of 2007 ==================================================== RENU DEVI, WIFE OF SRI SANTOSH KUMAR PANDIT, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KHADRA, P.O. DANAW, POLICE STATION- JAGDISHPUR, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR :--- PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BHOJPUR (ARA). 3. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, JAGDISHPUR, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR. 4. ANGAN BARI SEWIKA KHADRA CENTRE, P.O. DAWA, POLICE STATION- JAGDISHPUR, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR. 5. MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT DAWA, POLICE STATION- JAGDISHPUR, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR :---RESPONDENTS. ==================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s: Mr. JITENDRA PD.SINGH For the Respondent/s: Mr. KAMLENDRA PRASAD SINGH, A.C. TO G.A.5. ==================================================== 2. 01.07.2011. Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the averments made in paragraph 4 of the petition as thereunder on account of typing mistake for 2001, “2004” has been typed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 3. Petitioner was appointed to work as Sahayika in the Anganwadi Centre, Khadra within Jagdishpur Police Station of Bhojpur district. Pursuant to her appointment she discharged her duties to the satisfaction of all concerned but after some time Sewika appointed at the centre restrained the petitioner from marking her attendance whereafter the 2 present writ petition was filed praying, inter alia to direct the Sewika to permit the petitioner to mark her attendance and to discharge her duties. 4. Counter affidavit has been filed disputing the aforesaid assertion as thereunder it has been stated that petitioner voluntarily absented from the centre but now she has resumed her work with effect from 1st November, 2006 and since thereafter she is marking her attendance and is being paid her salary. 5. In rejoinder counsel for the petitioner disputed the averments made in the counter affidavit by stating that petitioner was always ready and willing to serve as Sahayika in the centre but it was the Sewika who was restraining her from marking the attendance. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties I am of the view that petitioner should represent before the Child Development Project Officer, Jagdishpur who should enquire into the matter and pass appropriate order. In the event Child Development Project Officer is of the view that petitioner was restrained from marking her 3 attendance by the Sewika, the Child Development Project Officer shall ensure that arrears of salary for the period during which petitioner was restrained from marking her attendance by the Sewika is paid to the petitioner. Appropriate order in this regard be passed by the Child Development Project Officer, as early as possible, in any case within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the Child Development Project Officer. 7. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)