Vijeta Kumari vs State Of Bihar Through And Ors

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that private respondent No. 10 though has been selected to be engaged as Aanganbari Sevika at the concerned Centre, but no appointment has been given to her because the salary slip of her husband is not being provided. It has been contended that private respondent No. 10 ought to be disqualified for being engaged as Aanganbari Sevika because of her husband being employed with a salary of more than Rs. 12,000/-. The fact that the husband of private respondent No. 10 has not been providing the salary-slip is an indicator of the fact that she is not entitled to be engaged/appointed as the Aanganbari Sevika at the concerned Centre. It has further been submitted that in the event of the candidature of private respondent No. 10 being rejected, the petitioner would be the first beneficiary.

In any view of the matter, this Court would not like to pass any order before the complaint is taken to the first authority under the scheme, viz., the C.D.P.O. of the concerned Block.

Should the petitioner make necessary complaint before the concerned C.D.P.O. regarding defective selection of private respondent No. 10 on the post of Aanganbari Sevika at the concerned Centre, within a period of two weeks from today, the concerned respondent, after hearing the parties, especially the petitioner and private respondent No. 10, and verifying all the facts, shall pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of thirty days which is the time-line prescribed under the new Guidelines of 2019.

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.