IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.648 of 2007 SUMITRA DEVI @ SUMITA KUMARI, wife of Shri Byas Paswan, resident of village Dumdumawa, P.S. Sathi, District West Champaran … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through the Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, I.C.D.S. Directorate, Bihar, Patna 4. The Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah 5. The Child Development Project Officer, Lauria, West Champaran 6. The Gram Panchayat Raj Sathi through the Mukhia Gram Panchayat Raj Sathi, Block Lauria, District West Champaran 7. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Sathi, Block Lauria, District West Champaran 8. Asha Devi, wife of Krishna Kumar Kushwaha, resident of village Dumdumawa, P.S. Sathi, District West Champaran … Respondents. ----------- 2. 19.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The prayer in this writ application of the petitioner reads as follows: “A. For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order/s direction commanding the respondents for the followings: I. To select and to appoint the petitioner as Anganbari Sevika for the Anganbari Centre No. 10 falling within the village Dumdumawa, Purabi Tola of Gram Panchayat Raj Sathi, of Lauria Block of West Champaran District. 2 II.To cancel the selection of the respondent no.9 on the aforesaid post.” With reference to the aforementioned prayer Mr. Shekhar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the selection of respondent no.9 was clearly vitiated on account of her husband, Krishna Kumar Kushwaha, being elected member of the Ward of Gram Panchayat, Raj Sathi. He would also submit that in fact a representation was filed by the petitioner to the Collector with regard to illegal omission of the petitioner from the zone of selection and favoritism shown in the selection and appointment of respondent no.9 but that did not heed any response. Counsel for the State who has not filed any counter affidavit has taken a plea that this aspect of the husband of respondent no.9 being elected member of the Ward of Gram Panchayat, Raj Sathi was never raised in the representation. In the opinion of this Court it would be too technical to reject the case of the petitioner only on the ground that he 3 had not raised a particular issue with regard to selection and appointment of respondent no.9 when at least the petitioner had filed a representation assailing the decision of Gram Sabha with regard to selection and appointment of respondent no.9. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is given liberty to file a fresh representation to the Collector of West Champaran District raising all the possible pleas as with regard to omission of her name and alleged illegalities in the selection and appointment of respondent no.9. In the event of filing of such a representation alongwith a copy of this order the concerned Collector of West Champaran District would take a necessary decision in terms of the provisions made in the circular of the State Government which was then in force on the date of selection and appointment of respondent no.9. It goes without saying that before passing any order the Collector of the District will give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, 4 respondent no.9 as also the representative of the concerned Gram Panchayat. Such exercise, therefore, must be completed by the Collector within a period of six months from the date of filing of a fresh representation as indicated above. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/