SANGITA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 12.03.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No.9004 of 2010, by which the appointment of the appellant has been held to be illegal and thus the order of the District Programme Officer, declaring the appointment of the appellant as illegal, has been upheld.

(2.) The writ petitioner and the present appellant had responded to an advertisement published for appointment of Anganbari Sevika. The writ petitioner-Rinku Kumari (respondent no.9), who was possessing the qualification of Madhyama from Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna, was claiming the said qualification to be equivalent to Matriculation whereas the appellant had the qualification of Vidhya Vinodini from Prayag Mahila Vidyapeeth, Allahabad, which was not recognized by the State of Bihar. Nevertheless, at the Aam Sabha, vide its proceeding dated 15.09.2008, Sangita Devi, the present appellant, was appointed as Anganbari Sevika defeating the case of the writ petitioner, which, according to her, was per se illegal.

(3.) Constrained by the action of the Aam Sabha, the writ petitioner filed an application before the District Programme Officer, Muzaffarpur, who categorically held that the qualification of Vidya Vinodini acquired by the appellant/respondent No.9, from Prayag Mahila Vidhyapeeth, Allahabad, not being a recognized institution by the State of Bihar as being equivalent to the qualification of Matriculation, the appellant Sangita Devi could not have been appointed as Anganbari Sevika.