Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
Tara Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
1. This is petitioner’s third writ petition instituted in this Court assailing the selection and appointment of respondent No.6 as Anganwari Helper on 21.07.2007 in Anganwari Centre Susaya, Post Office Piplughat, Tehsil Arki, District Solan.
2. Facts:
(i) Pursuant to a selection process initiated by the respondent-Department, Smt. Sunita Devi-respondent No.6 was selected as Anganwari Helper on 21.07.2007. Petitionerfiled an appeal before the Additional District Magistrate, Solan, assailing the selection of respondent No.6. The appeal was dismissed on 29.06.2009.
(ii) Feeling aggrieved against the rejection of her appeal, the petitioner preferred second appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla Division. The Divisional Commissioner remanded the case to the Deputy Commissioner, Solan for fresh adjudication. The Deputy Commissioner, Solan once again dismissed the appeal on22.10.2011.
(iii) Petitioner next filed a Civil Writ Petition, bearing CWP No.11563 of 2011. The writ petition was allowed on 12.05.2017. The order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Solan on 22.10.2011 was quashed and set aside, being non-speaking. Operative part of the judgment da
Eligibility criteria for appointment must be strictly adhered to; membership in a joint family does not disqualify a candidate if income limits are met.
Minimum qualification for Anganwadi Helper must be met before considering preference for BPL candidates; engagement lacking this qualification is a nullity.
The validity of a resident certificate issued under superseded rules is maintained unless explicitly stated otherwise; thus, retrospective application of new rules is not permissible.
Eligibility criteria for recruitment cannot be altered mid-process without proper notification, ensuring fairness and adherence to established rules.
Principles of natural justice demand that before arriving at any decision which has serious implications and consequences to any person, such person must be heard in his or her defence.
Engagement orders in public service can be revised when based on a mistake, particularly if misrepresentation affects eligibility.
Under Article 226, writ courts do not re-appreciate disputed facts in income certificate cancellations; assets inconsistent with declared low family income justify upholding authority's findings.
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
