Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Angan Bari Sevika in the newly created Centre at Bengdubbi, Naya Basti, Sahebganj in place of respondent no. 8 and further prayer has been made to set aside the appointment of respondent no. 8 on the ground that her appointment was made on the basis of forged documents.
(2.) Heard Mr. Gautam Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Singh J.C to learned G.P. IV and Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no. 8.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for appointment on the post in question, meeting of Gram Sabha was convened on 24.08.2009, however due to some objection raised by some members of Gram Sabha regarding nutrition areas the meeting dated 24.08.2009 was cancelled and next meeting was held on 29.08.2009, in which, the petitioner along with respondent no. 8 participated, but later on the petitioner came to know that respondent no. 8 has been selected and petitioner has been placed at serial no. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though in the meeting dated 29.08.2009 oral declaration was given by the authorities that petitioner has been found suitable for the post in question and she would shortly receive the offer of appointment but respondent no. 8 was given appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted with vehemence that immediately after coming to know about the selection of respondent no. 8, the petitioner represented before the respondents regarding the false and fabricated educational documents submitted by respondent no. 8 before Gram Sabha, basing on which she was selected, but, it did not evoke any response, hence, the petitioner moved before this Hon'ble Court by invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.;