AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Prabhakar Singh, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Utkarsh Bhushan, learned advocate for the State, whereas the State Health Society is being represented by Dr. Anand Kumar, learned advocate.
The challenge in the present writ petition is made to an order contained in Letter No. 184 dated 11.05.2026, issued by respondent no. 9, whereby and whereunder private respondent no. 11 has been selected as an ASHA worker against Code No. 174 of Ward No. 4, Block Riga, District Sitamarhi.
It is the contention of the petitioner that the entire selection process is said to have been tinkered by various irregularities, besides being in violation of the guidelines issued from time to time for the purposes of engagement/selection of ASHA workers.
Learned advocate for the petitioner, referring to the materials available on record, submitted that the concerned Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj Ganeshpur Babhangama, Sitamarhi, has acted in a most arbitrary manner, at whose behest the concerned authority initiated a process of selection for the appointment of four ASHA workers. However, surprisingly, only three vacant posts were published, and applications were invited for two posts. A meeting of the Aam Sabha was held, wherein only one candidate was selected for Ward No. 4. It is submitted that, despite the fact that the petitioner has been working as an ASHA worker in Ward No. 4, her candidature has not been considered, and private respondent no. 11 has been arbitrarily appointed after completely disregarding the prescriptions of the guidelines. The high-handedness of the respondent Mukhiya has been categorically averred in the writ petition, explaining how he influenced the In-charge Medical Officer and confined him in a room, and thereafter secured the appointment of private respondent no. 11 through wrongful means.
On the other hand, learned advocates for the State and the State Health Society submitted that, since certain allegations have been levelled against all the stakeholders, the matter is required to be looked into by the competent authority.
Considering the nature of the grievance, as also the fact that the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Sitamarhi, is the competent authority to look into the matter, this Court deems it fit and proper to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, by filing a detailed representation, preferably within a period of two weeks from today, along with all the necessary documents and a copy of this order. Upon receipt of the representation, it is expected that all the stakeholders shall be noticed and, upon perusal of the records and hearing the parties, a final order shall be passed within a further period of ten weeks.
The writ petition stands disposed of.