Patna High Court
MJC/688/2020 of Sanila Devi @ Sunila Devi @ Sanila Kumari @ Shanila Devi Vs The State of Bihar on 21 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.688 of 2020 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18844 of 2019 ====================================================== Sanila Devi @ Sunila Devi @ Sanila Kumari @ Shanila Devi Wife of Devendra Kumar Ram, Resident of Naya Tola,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.688 of 2020
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18844 of 2019
======================================================
Sanila Devi @ Sunila Devi @ Sanila Kumari @ Shanila Devi Wife of Devendra Kumar Ram, Resident of Naya Tola, Lakhanjhari, Prakhand-Purnea East, P.O. Mohan Kunda, Via- Gulab Bagh, District- Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Director, Social Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea.
4.
The Collector, Purnea.
5.
The District Programme Officer, Purnea.
6.
The Child Development Project Officer, Purnea (Rural), Baisi, Purnea.
7.
The Ward Commissioner cum Chairman, Hansda, Purnea.
8.
The Ward Commissioner, Hansda Panchayat, Ward No. 36, Purnea East, Purnea.
9.
Smt. Sangita Kumari, Anganbari Sevika, Centre No. 90A, Mushahari Tola, Ward No. 36 Lakhanjhari, Panchayat Hansda, Purnea (Rural), District- Purnea.
... ... Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
None
For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Kumari Amrita, GP-3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
21-08-2026 None appears on behalf of the petitioner. However, learned Advocate for the State is present.
2. This Court is apprised that the conducting lawyer, Mr. Anil Kumar Mukund, who had been appearing in this case, left for heavenly abode. It is further contended that the writ petition was dismissed on account of non-compliance of the Patna High Court MJC No.688 of 2020(3) dt.21-08-2026
peremptory order, and since the writ petition stood dismissed as against respondent no. 9, who was the main contesting respondent, the writ petition cannot proceed any further. Moreover, the matter also relates to selection of Aganwadi Sevika of the year 2018, and thereafter various subsequent developments took place, is the contention of the learned Advocate for the State.
3. Having considered the submissions advanced, as also the fact that there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, besides prima facie this Court is of the opinion that the matter has become infructuous on account of passage of time during the pendency of the present restoration application, the same stands dismissed.
shivank/- (Harish Kumar, J) U