Patna High Court

Puja KumariversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed; the petitioner must challenge the order before the District Magistrate within 30 days, with the Court condoning the lapse of the limitation period.

Summary

Puja Kumari filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking to set aside an order dated 25‑04‑2025 issued by the District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur, concerning her appointment under the Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika Appointment Guidelines, 2016. The State argued that the order should first be challenged before the Collector, but the petitioner directly approached the High Court. The Court noted that Rule 13 of the Guidelines mandates that such orders be contested before the District Magistrate within 30 days. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition and directed the petitioner to file a challenge before the District Magistrate within 30 days, granting liberty to condone the already‑expired limitation period in the interest of justice. The Court further ordered that any appeal filed within the stipulated period should be entertained on merits after condoning the delay.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition is maintainable when the grievance under the Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika Appointment Guidelines, 2016 is required to be challenged before the District Magistrate within 30 days.
Whether the limitation period for challenging the order can be condoned in the interest of justice.

Subjects

writ petition
administrative law
limitation period
Anganwadi Sevika/Sahayika Appointment Guidelines, 2016
challenge before district magistrate
condonation of delay

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8499 of 2025
                 ======================================================
                 Puja Kumari Wife of Mukesh Kumar Resident of Village- Lasakaripur, P.S.-
                 Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.

                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department,
                 Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
           3.    The Director, I.C.D.S., Bihar, Patna.
           4.    The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.
           5.    The District Program Officer, Muzaffarpur.
           6.    The Child Development Program Officer, Kanti, Muzaffarpur.
           7.    Gayatri Kumari, Wife of Anil Kumar Resident of Village- Lasakaripur, Ward
                 No.- 09, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-23
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   counsel for the State.

                                2. The present writ petition has been filed for setting

                   aside the order dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure- P/5), passed by the

                   District Program Officer, Muzaffarpur (respondent No. 5).

                                3. Learned counsel for the State has raised a

                   preliminary objection and submits that the order passed by the

                   District Program Officer is challengeable before the concerned

                   Collector, but the petitioner has directly preferred the present

                   writ petition instead of challenging the order before the

                   Collector.
         Patna High Court CWJC No.8499 of 2025(2) dt.18-04-2026
                                                     2/2




                                4. It transpires to this Court that the grievance of the

                   petitioner      has     been       raised      under   the   Anganwadi

                   Sevika/Sahayika Appointment Guidelines, 2016, and according

                   to Rule 13 of the said Guidelines, the order passed by the D.P.O.

                   is challengeable before the District Magistrate within 30 days.

                                5. In this view of the matter, the present writ petition

                   stands disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge

                   the order dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P/5), passed by the

                   District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur (respondent No. 5),

                   before the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur (respondent No. 4)

                   within 30 days from today.

                                6. It is made clear that the period of limitation has

                   already lapsed, but in the interest of justice, liberty is hereby

                   granted to the petitioner that, if the petitioner prefers an appeal

                   within 30 days from today, then the Appellate Court shall

                   condone the delay and pass order on merits after hearing all

                   concerned.



                                                                  (Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.