Patna High Court
Shabanam Kumari @ Shabnam KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Appointments made to posts that were not sanctioned by the government are illegal, and the orders cancelling such appointments stand, warranting dismissal of the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Shabanam Kumari, challenged two orders that cancelled her selection as an Anganbari Sevika and dismissed a related case, seeking certiorari and mandamus for appointment. She argued that the cancellation was made without hearing and that the appointments were made under proper selection guidelines, contending that any irregularities lay with officials, not the applicants. The State contended that appointments were made to posts lacking governmental sanction and that action should be taken against those responsible. The Court noted that the Divisional Commissioner had expressly held that the appointments were to unsanctioned posts, rendering them illegal. Relying on this finding, the Court dismissed the writ petition, refusing to quash the orders or direct appointment. Consequently, the petitioner’s reliefs were denied.
Issues considered
- Whether the order of the Divisional Commissioner cancelling the petitioner’s selection as Anganbari Sevika is liable to be quashed on grounds of procedural irregularity.
- Whether the appointment of Anganbari Sevikas to posts without governmental sanction is valid under the Anganbari Sevika and Sahayika Selection Guidelines.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a mandamus directing her appointment despite the alleged lack of sanction.
Subjects
- Anganbari Sevika appointment
- ICDS
- government sanction
- certiorari
- mandamus
- writ petition
- selection guidelines
- illegal appointment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1193 of 2026
======================================================
Shabanam Kumari @ Shabnam Kumari W/o- Tejbal Singh, resident of
Village- Kudra Ward No. 06 (New Ward No. 10 of Nagar Panchayat- Kudra)
Old Panchayat- Jahanabad, P.O. and P.S.- Kudra, District- Kaimur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Social
Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Directorate of Integrated Child Development Services
(I.C.D.S.) Second Floor, Indira Bhawan, Patna, Bihar, Pin- 800001.
3. The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, District- Kaimur.
5. The District Program Officer (ICDS), District- Kaimur.
6. The Child Development Project Officer, Kudra, District- Kaimur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (22)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 03-02-2026
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and
learned Counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by
the petitioner with the following reliefs:
“(i). For issuance of an
appropriate writ/writs, order\orders,
direction/directions in the nature of
certiorari for quashing the order dated
02.08.2025 passed by Learned Divisional
Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna in
Patna High Court CWJC No.1193 of 2026 dt.03-02-2026
2/5
ICDS No. 226 of 2024 whereby he
dismissed the case filed by petitioner and
others.
(ii). For issuance of an
appropriate writ/writs, order/orders,
direction/directions in the nature of
certiorari for quashing the order dated
11.07.2020 passed by Learned District
Programme Officer (ICDS), Kaimur at
Bhabua, whereby he cancelled the
selection of the petitioner on the post of
Aganbari Sevika, Aganbari Centre No.
186, Gram panchayat- Jahanabad, Ward
No.6 (Now New ward No. 10 of Nagar
Panchayat-Kudra) in Block-Kudra,
district- Kaimur at Bhabua without giving
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
(iii). For issuance of an
appropriate writ, order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing the
respondent authorities to make
appointment of the petitioner in the
Aganbari Centre for the post of Aganbari
Sevika forthwith because the respondent
authorities have already issued the
appointment letter in favour of petitioner
for her respective posts after completing
the entire selection process in Block-
Kudra, district- Kaimur.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1193 of 2026 dt.03-02-2026
3/5
(iv). For grant of any
relief(s) the petitioner would be found
entitled to in the facts and circumstances of
the case.”
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly
submits that prior to the said order, nine persons moved
before this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No.9934 of 2020 in
which vide order dated 01.08.2024 this Court had directed to
the petitioner to prefer appeal, according to the Anganbari
Sevika and Sahayika Selection Guidelines, before the
appellate authority and the appellate authority was directed to
pass a reasoned and speaking order within 90 days. In result
thereof, the order was passed on 02.08.2025 which is before
this Court as impugned under Annexure-P/9.
4. Learned Counsel in support of his argument
submits that by the said order it has been indicated that there
were nine Anganwari Centres for which there was no sanction
even then appointment had taken place. Counsel submits that
petitioners cannot be held responsible for the said
advertisement. If any wrong has been done, it has been taken
place at the level of officials. He further submits that there
were ten persons. For one person writ petition is still pending
in which counter affidavit has been called for, namely, CWJC
Patna High Court CWJC No.1193 of 2026 dt.03-02-2026
4/5
No.18787 of 2025 but for nine persons they have moved
another writ petition, namely, CWJC No.9934 of 2020 in
which this Court has directed to prefer appeal before the
appellate authority and appellate authority had passed order.
He submits that the petitioner is absolutely not at fault and,
therefore, the wrong which has been done at the level of the
respondent authorities, the petitioner may not be punished.
5. Learned Counsel for the State, on the other
hand, submits that in the present writ petition the matter
relating to appoint of Anganbari Sevika and Sahayika on ten
centres, for which there was either no sanction or the said post
was not directed to be published, but at the level of C.D.P.O.
the appointment was done. In the order sheet, it has been
categorically stated by the Commissioner that those persons
who are responsible for such type of appointment, order has
been passed for taking action against them.
6. In the light of the submissions, this Court is
of the firm view that the Commissioner, Patna Division has
categorically taken the stand that appointment of such persons
including the present nine has been done on the post which
were not sanctioned by the government.
7. In this view of the matter, this Court has no
Patna High Court CWJC No.1193 of 2026 dt.03-02-2026
5/5
option but to dismiss the present writ petition. Accordingly,
the writ petition stands dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Mkr./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 09.02.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…