Sulochna Devi vs State of Jharkhand

Mr. Ananda Sen, J. - The petitioner has challenged the action of the respondents by which Arti Devi, respondent no.7 has been appointed as Sanyojika of Saraswati Bahini Sanchalan Committee, which is in-charge of preparation and distribution of mid-day-meal.

Counsel for the petitioner relying on Annexure-2 to the writ application, which is minute of the meeting dated 20.01.2004, submits that the petitioner was one of the members of Saraswati Bahini Sanchalan Committee. He submits that later on she was made Sanjojika of Saraswati Bahini Sanchalan Committee, but without there being any document suggesting that she was removed, Smt. Arti Devi, respodnent No.7 was appointed later on as convener of the said Committee.

Resolution dated 14.08.2003 issued by Human Resources Development Department, govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi, provides for formation of a Committee under the name and style of "Saraswati Bahini". The said Committee was made in-charge to look after the preparation and distribution of mid-day-meal of each Schools. The said Committee should consist of mothers of the students, who are studying in the particular school for which the Committee is formed.

Vide Annexure-2, which is the minutes of the meetings of the Committee dated 20.01.2004, the Committee was constituted, in which the petitioner was one of the members. Later on in place of the petitioner one Arti Devi was selected to be a member of the said Committee and said Arti Devi was made convener.

From the records, I find that Arti Devi was made convener in the meeting held by the Village Committee on 30.03.2007. The minutes of the said meeting was also brought on record. From perusal of the said minutes, it is clear that Saraswati Bahini committee was reconstituted and Arti Devi was appointed as a convener of the Saraswati Bahini committee, on its reconstitution. This clearly suggests that earlier committee was dissolved and a new Committee was constituted. In the new committee the petitioner was not included and in her place, petitioner claims, that Arti Devi was appointed.

On enquiry, it was informed at the bar, that on the date when the new committee was constituted, neither the son or the daughter of the petitioner was studying in the said school. As per resolution dated 14.08.2003 "Saraswati Bahini committee" should consist of mothers of the students, who are studying in the said school.

Since it is admitted that, neither the son nor the daughter, of the petitioner was studying in the school, when new Committee was constituted, no occasion arose to include the petitioner in the said Committee as a member. Thus, it was a correct decision to reconstitute a committee and appoint a new person as the convener.

I find no illegality in the action of the respondents in not including the name of the petitioner in the newly reconstituted committee, and also in appointing a new convener.

This writ application is, thus, dismissed.