IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17570 of 2009 1. SUNITA SINHA W/O BINKATESH SHARMA R/O VILL DUMRA, HASPURA, P.S HASPURA, DISTT-AURANGABAD Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AURANGABAD 3. THE DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER AURANGABAD 4. THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER AURANGABAD 5. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER DAUDNAGAR(AURANGABAD) 6. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER HASPURA,(AURANGABAD) 7. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HASPURA,(AURANGABAD) 8. THE MUKHIYA , GRAM PANCHAYAT DUMARO, HASPURA, AURANGABAD 9. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, GRAM PANCHAYAT DUMRA,HASPURA,AURANGABAD 10. ANNPURNA DEVI W/O SHAKTI KUMAR PANDEY R/O VILL DUMRA HASPURA, P.S.HASPURA, DISTT-AURANGABAD ----------- 2. 24.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Relying upon a Division Bench order in L.P.A. No. 863 of 2009, learned counsel submits that the impugned order dated 15.10.2009 passed by the District Programme Officer terminating the selection/appointment of the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sewika, is without jurisdiction as the District Programme Officer has no such powers. The Division Bench has drawn a distinction between the powers of the District Programme Officer to terminate appointment on allegations of irregularity at the Kendra and the lack of jurisdiction to interfere with the appointment when issues at the selection stage are raised when the authority lies with the District Magistrate alone to 2 pass appropriate orders. Counsel for the State submits that even in view of the Division Bench judgment, the order of the District Programme Officer may be construed an enquiry report where the petitioner had an opportunity also and the District Magistrate shall be at liberty to take an appropriate decision in the matter in light thereof. The order dated 15.10.2009 is accordingly set aside. This order shall not preclude the District Magistrate from exercising his powers, in accordance with law, on the order dated 15.10.2009, keeping in mind that the petitioner has already had an opportunity of hearing. The writ application stands allowed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)