Patna High Court
Archana AnandversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that the petitioner must challenge the appointment before the District Programme Officer, and therefore the writ petition is disposed.
Summary
The petitioner, Archana Anand, filed a writ petition challenging the appointment of an Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika in Vaishali district, alleging that the selection was made without following the proper procedure prescribed in a 2018 advertisement and related guidelines. An interlocutory application was filed to replace the incorrectly named respondent Kalpana Kumari with Kanchan Kumari and to add the Child Development Project Officer as a respondent, which the court allowed. The court observed that the petitioner’s grievance pertains to the appointment process and that the appropriate remedy is to challenge the selection before the District Programme Officer (DPO) under the applicable law. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed, granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the DPO within 30 days, and directing the DPO to pass an order after hearing the parties within 90 days. The court did not intervene directly in the appointment but set procedural steps for the petitioner to seek redress.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for a candidate aggrieved by an alleged irregular appointment of an Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika?
- Can the High Court issue a writ of mandamus or quash the appointment order in the absence of a specific statutory provision?
- Whether the appointment process complied with the 2018 advertisement and the 2016/2019 selection guidelines.
Subjects
- Anganwadi
- appointment procedure
- selection guidelines
- writ of mandamus
- administrative law
- Integrated Child Development Services
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.47 of 2025
======================================================
Archana Anand W/o Rajiv Kumar, R/o Village-Gorigaman, P.S.-Mahua,
District-Vaishali, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, District-Vaishali at Hajipur.
4. The Director, Integrated Child Development Services, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The District Programme Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur, District-Vaishali at
Hajipur.
6. The Child Development Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur, District-Vaishali at
Hajipur.
7. Kanchan Kumari D/o unknown, R/o unknown.
8. The Child Development Project Officer, Mahua, Vaishali, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mujtabaul Haque (GP-12)
Mr. Manish Kumar (AC to GP-12)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
4 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
Re:- I.A. No. 1 of 2026
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this
interlocutory application has been filed for deleting the name of
‘Kalpana Kumari’ as respondent no.7 in the soft copy and hard
Patna High Court CWJC No.47 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
2/6
copy of the present writ petition and thereafter, implead/add
‘Kanchan Kumari’ as Respondent no.7 and ‘The Child
Development Project Officer, Mahua, Vaishali as Respondent
no.8.
2. Learned counsel for the State has no objection for
the same.
3. As such, I.A. No. 1 of 2026 stands allowed.
4. Registry is directed to delete the name of ‘Kalpana
Kumari’ as respondent no.7 in the soft copy and hard copy of
the present writ petition and thereafter add ‘Kanchan Kumari’ as
respondent no.7 and ‘The Child Development Project Officer,
Mahua, Vaishali, Bihar’ as respondent no.8, both in the soft
copy and hard copy of the present writ petition, the details of
which, are mentioned in para 1 of I.A. No. 1 of 2026.
Re:- C.W.J.C. No. 47 of 2025
The present writ petition has been filed for the
following relief/s:-
“A. For issuing a writ of mandamus or any
other appropriate writ directing the
Respondents to produce the letter(s), order(s),
etc whereby and whereunder the appointment
of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika(s) for
Vishnupur Hiraram Panchayat, Mahua,
Patna High Court CWJC No.47 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
3/6
District- Vaishali has been done without
following proper procedure in violation of
letter dated 11.02.2023 bearing memo no. 58.
B. For quashing the letter(s), order(s), etc so
produced, whereby and whereunder the
appointment of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika(s)
for Vishnupur Hiraram Panchayat, Mahua,
District- Vaishali has been done without
following proper procedure in violation of
letter dated 11.02.2023 bearing memo no. 58.
C. For issuing a writ of mandamus or any
other appropriate writ directing the
Respondents to conduct fresh appointment of
Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika(s).
D. For passing such further or other order(s)
as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper
in the circumstances of the case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a candidate for selection for the post of Anganwadi
Sevika/Sahayika for Anganwadi Kendra No. 319, Ward No. 10
of Gram Panchayat- Vishnupur Hiraram, P.S.-Mahua and
District- Vaishali. Counsel submits that an advertisement was
published in January, 2018 for the selection of Anganwadi
Sevika/Sahayika for 69 Anganwadi centres. However, the same
was stayed vide order dated 15.03.2018 in C.W.J.C. No. 3807 of
2018. Subsequently, the stay was revoked vide order dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.47 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
4/6
10.03.2022. Counsel submits that the Child Development
Project Officer, Mahua (Vaishali) vide letter No. 158 dated
14.03.2022 sought guidance from the District Program Officer,
Vaishali regarding the process of appointment of these
Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika. Counsel submits that the D.P.O,
Vaishali vide Letter No. 605 dated 26.03.2022 further wrote to
the Director, I.C.D.S., Patna, Bihar seeking his guidance that
whether such selection shall be made pursuant to the previously
issued advertisement of 2018 according to guidelines of 2016 or
shall be made by floating new advertisement governed by the
selection guidelines of 2019. Counsel submits that the Director,
I.C.D.S. directed that the selection process shall be as per the
advertisement issued in 2018 which shall be governed by the
selection guidelines of 2016. Counsel submits that the selection
of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika could not be made in-spite of
two meetings on two occasions. He submits that a representation
has been made that in case, selection could not be completed on
two different meetings, then fresh advertisement has to be made.
Counsel further submits that in this regard, representation was
made, but nothing happened and selection was continued in
which, respondent no.7 was selected. Counsel submits that vide
order dated 19.02.2026, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has
Patna High Court CWJC No.47 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
5/6
directed the petitioner to file an application for adding the
selected candidate namely, Kanchan Kumari as also the Child
Development Project Officer, Mahua, Vaishali as party
respondents in the instant application.
3. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that the Director, I.C.D.S has written a letter to the
D.P.O contained in Memo No. 3364 dated 26.06.2023 that there
is no provision of holding special Aam Sabha. But, selection for
Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika has not been stopped. Counsel
submits that in continuance of the guideline, the selection was
completed in which, one Kanchan Kumari has been selected.
4. In the light of the pleadings and the materials on
record, it transpires to this Court that the petitioner is aggrieved
by the selection process, but in-spite of his objection and
pendency of the writ petition, selection process was completed.
If, petitioner is interested to challenge the selection of the
person concerned, then he has only remedy is to challenge the
appointment of Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika before the D.P.O.
in accordance with law.
5. As such, the present writ petition stands disposed
off with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the selection of
respondent no.7 by filing the application before the concerned
Patna High Court CWJC No.47 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026
6/6
D.P.O, within 30 days from today. The Respondent no.5 shall
pass order after hearing the petitioner as well as the selected
candidate (respondent no.7) within 90 days thereafter. The said
90 days shall be counted from the date of appearance of all
concerned.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U
Checking your session…