Patna High Court
Priyanka Kumari @ Priyanka DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The petition was dismissed as withdrawn after the Court granted permission to withdraw the writ petition.
Summary
Petitioner Priyanka Kumari filed a writ petition challenging an inquiry report of a three‑member committee that held her Anganwadi Sevika posting was invalid because the villages of Chordihara and Sarhula were said to belong to different wards. She sought a writ of certiorari to quash the report and a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to allow her to continue as Anganwadi Sevika of Ward No. 12, asserting that the villages form a single ward for electoral purposes. The respondents, representing various officials of the Department of Social Welfare, opposed the petition. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner requested permission to withdraw the petition to pursue appropriate remedial steps. The Court granted the withdrawal request and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether the three‑member committee's inquiry report determining ward boundaries and the petitioner’s eligibility as Anganwadi Sevika is liable to be quashed by a writ of certiorari.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allow her to continue in the post of Anganwadi Sevika of Ward No. 12.
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- Anganwadi Sevika
- ward jurisdiction
- withdrawal of petition
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13310 of 2022
======================================================
Priyanka Kumari @ Priyanka Devi W/o Alok Kumar Singh Resident of Tola-
Chordihara, Village- Sarahula, P.O.- Harnathpur, P.S.- Mohania, Block-
Mohania, District- Kaimur (Bhabhua).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Social
Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), Department of
Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Deputy Director, Department of Welfare, Patna Division, Patna, Bihar.
4. The District Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabhua.
5. The District Programme Officer (ICDS), Kaimur at Bhabhua.
6. The Child Development Project Officer, Block- Mohania (Kaimur).
7. The Chairman-cum-Ward Member, Sevika Sahayika Selection Committee,
Anganwari Centre Code- 243, Ward No. 12, Gram Panchayat- Baghini,
Block- Mohania, District- Kaimur.
8. The Vice-President-cum-Ward Panch, Sevika Sahayika Selection
Committee, Ward No. 12, Anganwari Centre Code- 243, Gram Panchayat-
Baghini, Block- Mohania, District- Kaimur.
9. The Secretary-cum-Mahila Supervisor, Sevika Sahayika Selection
Committee, Ward No. 12, Anganwari Centre Code- 243, Gram Panchayat-
Baghini, Block- Mohania, District- Kaimur.
10. The Selection Committee, Ward No. 12, Anganwari Centre Code- 243,
Gram Panchayat- Baghini, Block- Mohania, District- Kaimur.
11. The Mahila Supervisor, the Child Development Project Officer, Block-
Mohania, District- Kaimur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prashant Pratap (GP-2)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
Patna High Court CWJC No.13310 of 2022(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
following relief/s:-
“I. To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of writ
of Certiorari for quashing the inquiry
report made by the Three Men
Committee dated 21.05.2022 by which
the Committee had hold that an
inspection of Village- Chordihra and
Village- Sarhula which comes under the
purview of Ward No. 12 & 11
respectively and the Committee found
that the Village Sarhula comes under the
purview of Ward No. 11 where the
Anganwari Sevika Priyanka Devi is
residing. It is stated that two wards,
Ward No. 11 & 12 is together made of
Village Chaudihra & Sarhula (in short
full voters of village Choradihara +
some voters of village Sarahula = ward
no 12, And only Some voters of village
Sarahula = ward no.11) i.e. Various
persons of Village Sarhula belong to
Ward No. 11 & 12. Even the person who
belongs to Ward No. 12 and his father
belongs to Ward No. 11 and as such it
cannot be said that the Ward No. 11 &
12 are separate wards and as such the
candidate of Anganwari Sevika of Ward
No. 12 can be made candidate of village
Patna High Court CWJC No.13310 of 2022(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
Sarahula and ward no.11.
II. To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of writ
of Mandamus directing the respondents
to let continue the petitioner as
Anganwari Sevika of Village Sarhula,
Panchayat Bagani, Distict- Kaimur of
Ward No. 12 as the petitioner is
permanent resident of Ward No. 12,
Village Sarahula and various persons of
Village Sarahula are resident of Ward
No. 12 as well Ward No. 11. Since the
year 2015, the petitioner is also a voter
of the same ward which is at serial no.
308. Since the year 2019, the petitioner
is a Anganwari Sevika and continued on
that post but now in the inquiry report
they have hold that Ward No. 11 & 12
are different and have been made of two
different villages separately, which is
actually not correct. But being relied
upon the report of three members
committee the Hon'ble Court rejected
the prayer of the petitioner prayed in
CWJC no 23937/2019 and ignored the
facts mentioned in different paragraphs
by only providing liberty to assail the
findings of the three members committee
in accordance with law.
III. To any other relief or reliefs for
Patna High Court CWJC No.13310 of 2022(2) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
which the petitioner is found to be
entitled in the facts and circumstances
of the case.”
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition to take
appropriate steps in accordance with law.
4. Permission is granted.
5. As such, the present writ petition stands dismissed
as withdrawn.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U
Checking your session…