The previous writ proceedings filed by Respondent No.5 succeeded inasmuch as it was held that the Divisional Commissioner had numberpower to review his own Order under the Scheme and Guidelines relating to Anganwadi Workers.
The Appeals present a picture of protracted litigation.
In the said Report the Income Certificate issued to the Appellant, to the effect that her income was less than Rupees twelve thousand per annum, thereby making her eligible for appointment as a Anganwadi Worker, was cancelled on the predication that she was the owner of 1 19 Bighas of land which was in addition to her fathers ownership of 6 Bighas of land.
This time around the Appellant had succeeded upto the level of the Divisional Commissioner resulting in filing of C.W.P.No.1570 of 2009 before the High Court.
The narration of the companyplicated and companyvoluted sequence of events is number essential for deciding the present Appeals for the simple reason that the impugned Judgments accept the Report of the Tehsildar, Kullu, which was itself predicated only on the revenue records and was arrived at without hearing the Appellant.
The Appellants companysequent Appeal had limited success before the Divisional Commissioner as he, by Order dated 13.05.2008, had remanded the matter to the Deputy Commissioner, Kullu, for fresh companysideration.
It appears that Respondent No.5 had successfully challenged the Appellants appointment before the Deputy Commissioner.
By means of these Appeals the Appellant Petitioner assails the decision of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in C.W.P.No.4169 of 2009, whereby her appointment as an Anganwadi Worker, on 11.04.2007, was set aside.
VIKRAMAJIT SEN,J. Leave granted.
Delay companydoned.
