Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Satyen Vaidya, JJ.
Ramna Devi - Appellant
Versus
State Of H P & Ors. - Respondents
L.P.A. No. 1 of 2021
Decided On : 12-07-2021
Income Certificate - Appointment of Anganwari Worker - Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (General) Rules, 1997 - Rule 21(2), CWP No. 1096 of 2010, CWP No. 1555 of 2010, CWP No. 8851 of 2011 - The court discussed the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (General) Rules, 1997, particularly Rule 21(2) which pertains to the maintenance of Pariwar Register and Registration of Birth, Death and Marriages, and the procedure to be followed in respect of separation of families. The court highlighted the mandatory procedure for separation of families and emphasized that the separation/deletion of the name of a family member was not in consonance with the mandatory provision of the Rules. The court also referred to previous judgments to support its interpretation of the Rules and emphasized that when a power is required to be exercised by a certain authority in a certain way, it should be exercised in that manner or not at all.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was appointed as Anganwari Worker based on an Income Certificate, which was later challenged by respondent No. 5 on the grounds that the appellant's mother-in-law's income had not been taken into consideration. The court discussed the veracity of the income certificate and the separation of the appellant's family as per the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (General) Rules, 1997.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the separation/deletion of the name of a family member was not in consonance with the mandatory provision of the Rules, and the appellant was not required to challenge the resolution regarding the separation of the family. The court also dismissed the contention that the order passed by the SDM was non-speaking and emphasized that equity considerations are not applicable in a case of clear statutory provisions.
Issues: The issues revolved around the veracity of the income certificate, the separation of the appellant's family as per the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (General) Rules, 1997, and the applicability of equity considerations in a case of clear statutory provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The mandatory procedure for separation of families as per the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (General) Rules, 1997, should be followed, and equity considerations are not applicable in a case of clear statutory provisions.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the parties were left to bear their own costs.
JUDGMENT
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. - Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition by the Writ Court, the appellant has filed the instant appeal.
2. The case has a chequered history. The appellant was appointed as Anganwari Worker on the strength of an Income Certificate No. 706/MC issued in her favour by the concerned Tehsildar on 14.05.2007. The income depicted therein was Rs.7000/- per annum.
3. Respondent No. 5 assailed the selection/appointment of the appellant on the ground that the income certificate of the petitioner was not in consonance with the law and facts inasmuch as, the appellant's mother-in-law Smt. Hari Devi's, income that was required to be included while computing appellant's income had not been taken into consideration.
4. During hearing of the appeal on 10.02.2010, the Appellate Court pursuant to judgment passed by learned Division Bench of this Court on 17.05.2010 in CWP No. 1096 of 2010, titled as Raksha Devi vs. State of H.P. (leading a bunch of writ petitions including CWP No. 1555 of 2010, Ramna Devi vs. State of H.P.), directed the competent authority to enquire into the veracity of the Income Certificates issued to the parties as on the relevant date.
5. In compliance to the aforesaid directions, the Tehsildar, Dehra, vide order dated 23.07.2011, verified the correctness of the income certificate issued in favour of the appellant and respondent No. 5, to which there was no objection even by the appellant as reflected in the statement recorded to this effect. Accordingly, there being no objection with regard to the veracity of income certificate of respondent No. 5, the order dated 23.07.2011 was affirmed.
6. However, the appeal filed against this order came to be allowed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Dehra on 26.12.2011 and the matter was remanded back to the Tehsildar for afresh decision.
7. On remand, the Tehsildar, after examining the matter afresh, vide its order dated 07.08.2014, held that the appellant had not separated from her mother-in-law in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Rule 21(2) of Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (General) Rules, 1997 (for short the 'Rules'), as existed on the date of alleged separation and further held the deletion of the name of the mother-in-law of the appellant from the 'Pariwar Register' to be illegal. It was further held that the pension of Smt. Hari Devi, mother-in-law of the appellant was required to be included while computing the income of the appellant. Consequently, the certificate dated 14.05.2007, issued in favour of the appellant, reflecting the annual income of the appellant as Rs.7000/- was ordered to be cancelled.
8. The oder so passed was unsuccessfully assailed before the SDM, Dehra, who vide his order dated 20.02.2017, dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant.
9. The appellant thereafter filed CWP No. 1478 of 2017 before this Court assailing therein the order dated 20.02.2017 but the said petition was withdrawn on 28.08.2017 with liberty to file afresh.
10. Thereafter CWP No. 2944 of 2017 was preferred by the appellant and the same came to be allowed by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2018 and the impugned order passed by the SDM was quashed and set aside on the basis of 'mutually agreed terms' between the parties. The SDM, Dehra was directed to consider and decide the matter afresh on its own merits in accordance with law.
11. In compliance to the aforesaid directions, the SDM, Dehra, heard the matter and vide order dated 14.02.2019, reached at the same conclusion that was drawn earlier vide order dated 20.02.2017, meaning thereby, that the order passed by the Tehsildar on 07.08.2014, cancelling the income certificate of the appellant dated 14.05.2007, was upheld.
12. The appellant assailed the aforesaid order by filing CWP No. 683 of 2019 before the learned Writ Court, which came to be dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 02.11.2020 and aggrieved thereby the appellant has filed the instant appeal.
13. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri,
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
