IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1720 of 2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 1436 of 2010 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No. 9368 of 2010 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1720 of 2010 ==================================================== Devamani Devi, wife of Shrawan Kumar, resident of Village- Andar Bazar Kadirgan j, P.S. & Distt. Nawadah. ….. ….. Respondent - Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Secretariat, Patna. 2. District Magistrate, Nawadah. 3. The District Programme Officer, Child Development Section, Nawadah Collectoriat, Nawadah. 4. The Child Development Programme Officer, Nawadah Sadar, Nawadah. ….. ….. Respondents-Respondents 5. Smt. Sima Kumari, W/o Rakesh Kumar, resident of Village- Kadirganj, Sangat, Andar Bazar, P.S. & Dist.-Nawadah. ….. ….. Petitioner-Respondent ==================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent: Mrs. Nilu Agrawal, G.A.-10 with Mr. Zaki Haidar, A.C. to G.A.-10 ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 2.11.2010. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1720 of 2010 with Interlocutory Application No. 9368 of 2010: - The delay of five days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory application No. 9368 of 2010 stands disposed of. This appeal has been preferred under Clause - 2 - X of the Letters Patent against the order dated 27th July 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 1436 of 2010. The writ petitioner an Anganbari Sahayika challenged the order of termination of her services. The learned single Judge has upheld the challenge and has set aside the order of termination of service. She has been visited with the punishment at par with the respondent no.5, the Anganbari Sevika, the appellant herein. Learned Advocate Mr. Birendra Kumar has appeared for the appellant. He has strenuously urged that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy of appeal before the District Magistrate. The learned single Judge ought not to have exercised extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. He has also submitted that the appellant, an Anganbari Sevika, has to work with the writ petitioner, the Anganbari Sahayika. It is the family members of the writ petitioner who created hurdle in the functioning of the appellant and they kept on demanding part of the ration meant for midday meal for the children. It may be noted, the order of termination of the service of the writ petitioner was made in respect of altercation between the family members of the writ petitioner and the appellant and not for any misconduct committed by the writ petitioner. The contention raised before us is not supported by the materials on record. Such a contention cannot be countenanced. For the aforesaid reason the appeal is devoid of merit. - 3 - The appeal is dismissed in limine. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Jyoti Saran, J)