Madhuresh Prasad, J. – Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent State. 2. It is submitted by the petitioner’s Counsel that the findings in the proceedings have been arrived at without examining the 14 Anganwari Sevikas in presence of the petitioner or her Advocate who was appearing in the proceeding. It is submitted that the statements given by 14 Anganwari Sevikas against the petitioner were also not made available during the proceedings and, as such, the order of punishment dated 27.4.2012 whereby the petitioner has been dismissed from service in purported exercise of power under Rule 14(11) of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005 is in sustainable in law. 3. Learned Counsel for the respondent State submits that the petitioner has adequate remedy and that the issue whether opportunity was granted in course of enquiry to cross-examine the 14 Anganwari Sevikas, and/or whether the statements allegedly submitted by them against the petitioner were made available to the petitioner or not, can well be seen by the authorities exercising the power of review under Rule 24(2) of the Bihar CCA Rules, 2005. 4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that apart from that there are other infirmities also which he would like to point out before the authority who will be exercising the power of review under Rule 24(2) of the aforesaid provision. 5. Having considered the submission of the parties the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to raise his objections before the Competent Authority under Rule 24(2) of the Bihar CCA Rules 2005 by filing review and/or in the form of memorial before the Competent Authority. 6. In the event such a review is filed within four weeks from today, the same shall be considered and final order thereupon be passed in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months thereafter. The writ petition stands disposed of.