Patna High Court
Anita KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Collector erred by relying solely on the husband's name in the voter list and the order dated 8 July 2021 is set aside.
Summary
The petitioner, Anita Kumari, challenged the Collector's order dated 8 July 2021 which set aside a prior order appointing her as Anganwadi Sevika for Ward No.9 in Gopalganj. The dispute centered on whether the respondent, Sunita Devi, satisfied the 2016 Guidelines requiring the applicant's husband/father‑in‑law to be a voter in the ward where the Anganwadi centre is located. Although Sunita Devi's husband’s name appeared in the voter list of Ward 9, the District Programme Officer found that the entire family was actually listed in Ward 8, indicating a lack of genuine residence in Ward 9. The Collector relied solely on the husband’s name in the voter list and failed to consider this evidence, leading the Court to hold that the Collector erred. Consequently, the Court set aside the Collector’s order and restored the petitioner’s appointment. The writ petition was allowed, directing the respondents not to act on the erroneous order.
Issues considered
- Whether the presence of the applicant's husband/father‑in‑law in the voter list of a ward suffices to establish the applicant's residence for Anganwadi Sevika appointment under the 2016 Guidelines.
- Whether the Collector erred in setting aside the District Programme Officer's order without considering the evidence of actual residence.
- Whether the writ petition seeking quashment of the Collector's order should be allowed.
Subjects
- Anganwadi Sevika appointment
- EBC reservation
- Voter list residency requirement
- 2016 Anganwadi Guidelines
- Administrative error
- Writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.379 of 2022
======================================================
Anita Kumari Wife of Ramesh Kumar Sah @ ramesh Kumar, Resident of
Village-Birwat Bazar, P.O.-Jagarnatha, Gram Panchayat and P.S. and
Block/Anchal-Uchkagaon, District-Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Social Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Directorate of Intergrated Child Development Services,
Government of Bihar, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
3. The Collector-Cum-District magistrate, Gopalganj.
4. The District Programme Officer, (ICDS), Gopalganj.
5. The Block Development Officer, Uchkagaon, Gopalanj.
6. The Child Development Project Officer, Uchkagaon, Gopalganj.
7. The Selection Committee through the Chairman-Cum-Ward Member For
Aanganbadi Sevika/Sahayika, Ward No. 09, Panchayat Raj-Uchkagaon
Under the Block Unchkagaon, District-Gopalganj.
8. The Mahila Paryavekshika-Cum-Secretary relates to Selection of
Aanganwari Sevika/Sahayika for Ward No.09, Panchayat Raj-Uchkagaon
Under the Block of Unchkagaon, District-Gopalganj.
9. Smt. Sunita Devi Wife of Satyendra Kumar, Resident of Village-Birwat
Bazar, P.O.-Jagarnatha, Gram Panchayat and P.S. and Block/ Anchal-
Unchkagaon, District-Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prashant Pratap (GP-2)
For the Respondent no.9 : Mr. Bindeshwar Sah, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-04-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the State of Bihar and learned counsel for the
respondent no.9
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
Patna High Court CWJC No.379 of 2022 dt.22-04-2026
2/8
the following relief (s) :-
“1.(i) For quashing the order of Collector,
Gopalganj passed in Aanganwadi Appeal Case
No. 02 of 2018 titled as Sunita Devi Vs. the State
of Bihar and others passed on 08.07.2020 signed
on 08.07.2021 which is supplied on 17.11.2021
contained as Annexure-9 to this writ application
whereby and where under who has set aside the
order dated 09.02.2018 passed by the District
Programme Officer (ICDS) Gopalganj which has
already been in-fructuous itself, whereby who has
directed the concern authority i.e. respondent no.
8 to call Aam Sabha according to rule/ guidelines
for selection of Aanganwari Sevika for ward no. 9
of Uchkagaon Panchayat under the block of
Uchkagaon in the District of Gopalganj.
(ii) And further for directing the concerned
respondent to not act upon the mandate of the
aforesaid order passed by the respondent no. 3
i.e. Collector, Gopalganj because it is passed
proper in mechanical manner without
examination of the stage of the selection
procedure relating to Aanganwari
Sevika/Sahayika for ward no. 9 of
Grampanchayat Raj Uchkagaon under the Block
and District of Gopalganj which is an outcome of
order dated 09.02.2018 contained in memo no.
408dated 01.03.2018 which is reflected as
Annexure-8 to this writ application.
(iii) And also for directing the concern respondent
to maintain the selection of the petitioner, who is
duly selected by the respondent no. 7 by proper
Patna High Court CWJC No.379 of 2022 dt.22-04-2026
3/8
manner and in view of the same on 23.03.2018
issued a selection letter in favour of her relating
to ward no. 9 village Birwat Bazar under Gram
Panchayat Raj Uchkagaon, for Aanganwari
Centre No. 176 relating to project/ Block of
Uchkagaon, in the district of Gopalganj.
(iv) And also for any other relief or reliefs for
which the petitioner is found to be entitled in the
facts and circumstances of this case.”
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that on the
respondents having come out with an advertisement for
appointment of Anganwadi Sevika at Anganwadi Centre
no.176 of Gram Panchayat Raj Uchkagaon in the District of
Gopalganj, the petitioner and respondent no.9 who both
belong to the Extremely Backward Class (E.B.C) category
filed their applications.
4. It is not in dispute that while the petitioner had
secured 53.2% marks, the respondent no.9 had secured 60.8%.
5. The petitioner challenged the appointment on the
post of Anganwadi Sevika in Anganwadi Centre no.176 by
filing an application before the District Programme Officer,
Gopalganj, which was registered as Anganwadi Appeal no.6
of 2018. After hearing both the petitioner as also the
respondent no.9, the appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed
and the Mahila Paryavekshika was allowed to conduct the
Patna High Court CWJC No.379 of 2022 dt.22-04-2026
4/8
Aam Sabha and select the petitioner as an Anganwadi Sevika.
The respondent no.9 challenged the order dated 1.3.2018 of
the District Programme Officer, Gopalganj by filing
Anganwadi Appeal no.2 of 2018 before the Collector,
Gopalganj. By order dated 8.7.2021, the anganwadi appeal
filed by the respondent no.9 was allowed, the order dated
1.3.2018 was set aside and appropriate directions were given
to the District Programme Officer, Gopalganj as also the
C.D.P.O, Uchkagaon.
6. It is against this order dated 8.7.2021 passed in
Anganwadi Appeal no.2 of 2018 allowing the appeal filed by
the respondent no.9 that the petitioner has preferred the instant
application.
7. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner that the matter in issue relates to appointment of
Anganwadi Sevika for ward no.9. From perusal of the voter
list for ward no.8, it would transpire that both the father-in-
law as also mother-in-law of the respondent no.9 is a resident
of ward no.8. Taking all these facts into consideration, the
case filed by the petitioner was allowed by the D.P.O,
Gopalganj vide his order dated 1.3.2018.
8. In response, it is submitted by learned counsel for
Patna High Court CWJC No.379 of 2022 dt.22-04-2026
5/8
the respondent no.9 that it is not in dispute that both the
petitioner as also respondent no.9 belong to the E.B.C
category and the respondent no.9 has more marks in her
matriculation i.e., 60.8% as against 53.2% secured by the
petitioner. It is submitted that there is also no dispute with
respect to the fact that 2016 Guidelines require the name of
the husband or father-in-law of the candidate to be in the voter
list for the relevant ward where the centre is located where the
anganwadi sevika is to be appointed. The name of the
husband is in the voter list for ward no.9. The same is not
under challenge. In these facts and circumstances, there being
no doubt about the respondent no.9 being a resident of ward
no.9 and having secured more marks than the petitioner in the
matriculation examination, the Collector rightly allowed the
appeal filed by the respondent no.9. As such there is no merit
in the instant application and the same be dismissed.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and having
perused the material on record.
10. The matter relates to appointment of an
Anganwadi Sevika in ward no.9 in Gram Panchayat
Uchkagaon in the District of Gopalganj.
11. There is no controversy with respect to the fact
Patna High Court CWJC No.379 of 2022 dt.22-04-2026
6/8
that both the petitioner as also the respondent no.9 belong to
the E.B.C category and while the petitioner secured 53.2%
marks, the respondent no.9 secured 60.8%.
12. It is also not in dispute that the name of the
respondent no.9 is in the voter list for ward no.9 where the
Anganwadi Kendra is situated. So far as this aspect is
concerned, the respondent no.9 satisfies the requirement of the
Guidelines for appointment as Anganwadi Sevika of the year
2016. It may be noted here that the questions as to whether the
respondent no.9 is a resident of ward no.9 where the
Anganwadi Kendra is situated or his name has been
mistakenly included in the said voter list was gone into in
detail by the District Programme Officer in his order dated
1.3.2018 (Annexure-8).
13. Having dealt with the question of the residence
of the husband of respondent no.9, the District Programme
Officer, Gopalganj noted that he is the only member of his
family whose name figures in the said voter list of ward no.9.
The name of respondent no.9 as also all the other members of
his family are at serial nos. 342 to 348 of the voter list of ward
no.8. Further, while including his name in the list of ward
no.9, his house number is mentioned as 26 which is the house
Patna High Court CWJC No.379 of 2022 dt.22-04-2026
7/8
belonging to a Muslim family by the name of Ali Hussain son
of Hamid Miyan. Further, the D.P.O took into consideration
that no documentary evidence had been given by the
respondent no.9 which would show that her house is in ward
no.9.
14. So far as the Collector in the order impugned
dated 8.7.2021 is concerned, he proceeded solely on the fact
that the name of the husband of respondent no.9 being in the
list of voter list of ward no.9, nothing else was required as per
the Guidelines of 2016.
15. On perusal of the Guidelines of 2016 brought on
record as Annexure-1 to the writ application, it transpires that
clause-5 thereof gives the title as ‘eligibility for being voter
and resident’. Thus so far as mention of the name of the
husband/father-in-law of the applicant being in the voter list
of the concerned ward is concerned, the same is only for the
purpose of evidence of the applicant being a resident of the
ward.
16. As stated herein above, inspite of the name of
the husband of respondent no.9 figuring in the voter list for
ward no.9, in the opinion of the Court, good and sound
reasons have been given by the District Programme Officer,
Patna High Court CWJC No.379 of 2022 dt.22-04-2026
8/8
Gopalganj and not accepting the respondent no.9 to be a
resident of ward no.9 inspite of the name of her husband
figuring in the voter list for ward no.9. The Collector
committed an error in not considering those aspects and
proceeding merely on the fact that the name of the husband of
respondent no.9 was in the voter list for ward no.9 inspite of
the fact that the name of all the family members was in the
voter list of ward no.8.
17. In view of the facts and circumstances stated
herein above, in the opinion of the Court, the Collector,
Gopalganj committed an error in his order dated 8.7.2021 in
allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent no.9.
18. The order dated 8.7.2020/8.7.2021 passed in
Anganwadi Appeal no. 2 of 2018 by the Collector, Gopalganj
is hereby set aside.
19. The writ application is allowed.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 22.04.2026.
Transmission Date
Checking your session…