IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15456 of 2007 MUNNI DEVI, wife of Vijendra Yadav, resident of village Hirapatti, P.O. Koriapatti, P.S. Jadia, District Supaul … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through the District Magistrate, Supaul 2. The Sub-divisional Officer, Tribeniganj, Supaul 3. The Child Development Project Officer, Tribeniganj, Supaul 4. Mukhia, Gram Panchayat, Koriapatti (East), Tribeniganj, Supaul 5. Savitri Devi, wife of Jai Prakash Yadav, resident of village Hirapatti, P.O. Koriapatti, P.S. jadia, District Supaul … Respondents. ----------- 2. 18.12.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows: “(i) For a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Anganbari Sevika in Gram Panchayat, Koriapatti (East, Tribeniganj, Supual. (ii) For further direction to the respondents to cancel the appointment of Savitri Devi (respondent no.5) who has been appointed inspite of the petitioner having more competent/ weightage than her.” With reference to the aforementioned relief, counsel for the petitioner would submit that three representations for the same relief were 2 filed by the petitioner before the Collector of Supaul District but no order has been passed thereon till date. In the opinion of this Court, once the Government has provided in the Scheme for appointment on the post of Anganwari Sevika that any issue relating to selection/ appointment on the post of Anganbari Sevika in the first instance has to be looked into and decided by the Collector of the District, the representation filed by the petitioner for this purpose ought to have been disposed of. That having not been done, this Court would direct the Collector of Supaul District to dispose of the representations of the petitioner, as contained in Annexures 5, 5/A and 5/B, by a reasoned order within the time frame now prescribed by the State Government in the latest circular dated 10.12.2009, of course after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, respondent no. 5 as also representative of concerned Gram Panchayat. In order to expedite the matter, this Court would also direct the petitioner to produce this order alongwith a copy of 3 her earlier representation before the Collector of the District. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/