IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2028 of 2010 1. NEELAM KUMARI W/O MANOJ KUMAR YADAV R/O VILL.- SAJJANDIHRA, P.O.- AKHTIYARPUR, P.S.- KARGAHAR, DISTT.- ROHTAS (SASARAM) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 3. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, KARGAHAR 4. THE D.P.O., ROHTAS (SASARAM) 5. TETRI DEVI W/O VINOD PASWAN R/O VILL.- SAJJANDIHRA, P.O.- AKHTIYARPUR, DISTT.- ROHTAS (SASARAM) ----------- 2. 16.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. It is submitted that earlier also the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Anganwari Sewika was questioned by another in C.W.J.C. No. 10454 of 2005. The respondents State in its counter affidavit supported the appointment of the petitioner when ultimately the writ petition, was dismissed on 13.4.2007. Notwithstanding the same, the District Programme Officer has again terminated the appointment of the petitioner on 9.12.2009. Though it is urged that the impugned order dated 9.12.2009 has been passed without notice and hearing granted to the petitioner, there is no pleading to that effect in the writ petition. Learned counsel for the State raises a 2 preliminary objection to the alternative remedy of appeal available to the petitioner against the impugned order dated 9.12.2009, before the District Magistrate. If the petitioner prefers such appeal within a period of 30 days from today, let the appellate authority decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order after hearing all concerned within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the petitioner prefers any application for interim relief, pending disposal of the appeal, it is required to be disposed by a speaking order within a maximum period of two weeks from the date of receipt and/or presentation thereof in light of the orders of this Court in 2004(2) PLJR 833 and C.W.J.C. No. 10454 of 2005. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)