IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2605 of 2005 SAHNAZ KHATOON, wife of Azaz Ahmad, resident of village Bhiroha, P.S. Jale, District Darbhanga … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Director Social Welfare, Welfare Department, Bihar, Patna 3. Distt. Magistrate, Darbhanga 4. Block Development Officer cum Child Development Project Officer, Jale, District Darbhanga 5. Mukhiya Gram Panchayat, Muraitha, P.S. Jale, District Darbhanga 6. Nemat Bano, wife of Mansoor, resident of village Sakarpur, P.S. Singhwara, District Darbhanga ... Respondents. ----------- 6. 12.11.2009 Counsel for the petitioner seeks to make certain correction in the cage column at page 2 and at page 9 of the writ application. The prayer is allowed. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The prayer made in this writ application reads as follows: “I. Certiorari:- For quashing the selection letter issued to the respondent no.6 (copy not available to the petitioner) by Child Development Project Officer, Respondent no.4, on the post of Anganwari Sewika, Ward No.8 for Gram Panchayat Muraitha, District Darbhanga. II. Mandamus:- For direction to the respondents to hold an inquiry into 2 the illegal appointment of Anganwari Sewika and after inquiry direction to appoint the petitioner on the said post.” With reference to the aforementioned relief counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner intends to file an exhaustive representation highlighting her all the grievance in a consolidated manner though earlier representation filed by Annexure 3 to the writ application had contained the gist of her grievance has remained pending till date. Counsel for the State would refer to the counter affidavit but then would not be in a position to say anything about the status of the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure 3. As the issues raised by the petitioner in this writ application involve pure question of fact it is desirable that the petitioner’s fresh representation to be filed alongwith a copy of this order should be considered by the Collector of the District, who would be under obligation to 3 pass a reasoned order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the private respondent and the concerned Gram Panchayat. Such exercise however must be completed by the Collector of the District within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a fresh representation of the petitioner. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/