Patna High Court
Nirmala KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Collector's order dated 4 August 2021 is set aside as it is not sustainable.
Summary
Nirmala Kumari applied for the post of Anganwadi Sevika in 2007 and, despite scoring the highest marks, was not selected. She filed a writ petition (CWJC 10196 of 2008) which sent the matter to the Collector, who later rejected her appeal (Anganwadi Appeal No.1 of 2018) on 4 August 2021 on the ground that she was not a resident of Sonbarsa Gram Panchayat. The petitioner challenged this order, arguing that the Collector had not heard either party or examined the evidence, and that she was indeed a resident as per the voter list. The High Court held that the Collector’s order was unsustainable because it was passed without a proper hearing or consideration of documents. Consequently, the order was set aside and the matter remanded to the Collector to decide afresh within three months after hearing both parties.
Issues considered
- Whether the Collector's order rejecting the petitioner's appeal is valid despite the absence of a hearing and consideration of evidence.
- Whether the petitioner satisfies the residency requirement for appointment as Anganwadi Sevika in Sonbarsa Gram Panchayat.
Subjects
- Anganwadi recruitment
- Residency requirement
- Administrative law
- Writ of certiorari
- Illegal order
- Hearing requirement
- Selection process
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.715 of 2022
======================================================
Nirmala Kumari Wife of Ravindra Prasad Resident of Village-Allapur, P.O.-
Sonbarsa, P.S.-Barauli, District-Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Social Welfare
Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Collector, Gopalganj.
3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Gopalganj, At Gopalganj, District-Gopalganj.
4. Welfare Officer, Gopalganj, District-Gopalganj.
5. Block Development Officer, Barauli at Barauli, District-Gopalganj.
6. Child Development Project Officer, Barauli at P.S.-Barauli, District-
Gopalganj.
7. Gram Sevak Cum Panchayat Sachiv (Sri Raj Lotan Dubey) Sonebarsha
Panchayat, P.S.-Barauli, District-Gopalganj.
8. Mukhiya Sonebarsha Panchayat (Smt. Krishnawati Devi, W/o Madan Ram)
P.O.-Sonebarsha Panchayat, P.S.-Barauli, District-Gopalganj.
9. Mukesh Devi Wife of Sanjay Chaudahry Resident of Village-Alapur, P.O.-
Sonebarsha, P.S.-Barauli, District-Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Upadhyay, Advocate
Ms. Tetara Kumari, Advocate
Mr. Raju Prasad, Advocate
Mr. Harendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prashant Pratap, G.P.2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
7 13-03-2026 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
praying for setting aside the order dated 4.8.2021 passed in
Anganwari Appeal no.1 of 2018 by the Collector, Gopalganj
whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected.
Patna High Court CWJC No.715 of 2022(7) dt.13-03-2026
2/4
3. The relevant facts in brief are that pursuant to the
respondents having come out with an advertisement in the year
2007 for selection and appointment of Anganwari Sevika and
Sahayika, the petitioner applied for appointment as an
Anganwari Sevika.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that inspite of names of both the petitioner and her husband,
being in the voterlist of the Gram Panchayat (Annexure 4 to the
writ application), in the Aam Sabha conducted for the selection,
while respondent no.9 was selected, the petitioner was not
selected inspite of having the highest marks. This led to the
petitioner filing CWJC no.10196 of 2008 which was disposed of
by order dated 14.11.2017 (Annexure 1) sending the petitioner
before the Collector who on filing of the appeal/objection by the
petitioner was required to examine the matter and pass a
reasoned order in accordance with law.
5. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that as directed the petitioner filed an appeal which
was registered as Anganwari Appeal no.1 of 2018 and the same
was rejected by the Collector by his order dated 4.8.2021 which
has been challenged by the petitioner in the instant writ
application.
Patna High Court CWJC No.715 of 2022(7) dt.13-03-2026
3/4
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken the
Court through the contents of the order dated 4.8.2021. On
perusal of the same, it transpires that the Collector has observed
therein that on perusal of the documents available on record,
that the fact which transpires is that the petitioner is mainly a
resident of Barauli Nagar Panchayat which is at present Ward
no.5 of Nagar Parishad Barauli and she is not a resident of
Sonbarsa Panchayat and with which she has no concern.
7. The application is opposed by learned counsel
appearing for the State of Bihar as also learned counsel
appearing for the respondent no.9. It is submitted by learned
counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has been
misrepresenting from the very beginning which is for this
reason that on an earlier occasion she has filed an application
for appointment as Anganwari Sevika of Ward no.5 of
Anganwari Barauli and subsequently has made an application
for appointment as Anganwari Sevika of Alapur Gram
Panchayat Raj Sonbarsa.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
having perused the material on record, it transpires that on the
matter being remanded to the Collector, Gopalganj by order
dated 14.11.2017 passed by this Court, the Collector was
Patna High Court CWJC No.715 of 2022(7) dt.13-03-2026
4/4
required to examine the documents as also the case of both the
parties and thereafter arrived at a conclusion adjudicating the
issue before it. However, on perusal of the order impugned
dated 4.8.2021, it transpires that the Collector observes therein
that he has gone through the documents available on record and
without discussing either the case of the parties or any of the
materials/documents, has only given his conclusion/finding of
the petitioner not being a resident of Gram Panchayat Sonbarsa.
9. In view of the facts and circumstances stated herein
above, the order dated 4.8.2021 passed by the Collector,
Gopalganj is not sustainable and is accordingly set aside.
10. The matter is remanded back to the Collector,
Gopalganj for once again deciding the same in accordance with
law after hearing both the parties within a period of three
months from today.
11. Both the petitioner as also the respondent no.9
shall appear before the Collector, Gopalganj on 25.3.2026 on
which date the Collector, Gopalganj shall fix a date and proceed
to decide the matter.
12. The writ application stands disposed of.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
U
Checking your session…