IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1367of 2018 Date of Decision: 13.07.2026. Meera Devi .....Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. ....Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge. ____________________________________________________________ Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Y. Paul, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. Arun Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.5. ___________________________________________________________ Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) . The instant petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- 1 That respondent be directed to implement the order passed by Additional District Magistrate Dated 03.10.2016 and be directed to give appointment to the petitioner. 2. That writ of prohibition may be issued and respondent may be directed not to appoint any person . 2. Heard Counsel for the parties. Perused the pleadings. 3. From the perusal of prayer No.1 reproduced herein above , it is evident that petitioner is seeking implementation of the directions passed by Additional District Magistrate dated 03.10.2016 (Annexure P-2 page 10 of the paper book). The relevant extract whereof reads as follow: 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 “Hence, selection of Smt. Trishana Devi (respondent) as an Anganwari worker at Anganwari Centre Nimawali is set aside and the Chairman, selection committee (SDM Sadar) and the Child Developement Project Officer, Sadar are directed to give appointment to the next eligible candidate after removing Smt. Trishana Devi from the post of Anganwari worker at Anganwari Centre Nimawali, Gram Mandyali. The selection committee is directed to look into the documents furnished by Smt. Trishna Devi pertaining to Meera Devi and, if needed, a separate enquiry to ascertain their authenticity be also made. Copy of the inquiry report be enclosed with this file. A copy of this order be sent to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, District Bilaspur and the Child Development Project Officer, Sadar, District Bilaspur for compliance. The original requisite file be returned to the general record room. This case file be consigned to the general record room after completing the codal formalities.” 4. Interview result sheet has been placed as Annexure P-1 (page 9 of the paper book). From the perusal of the same, it is evident that in terms of order of merit, respondent No.5 had been placed at Sr. No. 1 with 9.1 marks. Next in order of merit was the petitioner with 8.6 marks. The second in merit was one Veena Kumari with 8.4 marks. 5. In pursuance to the directions noted supra issued by the ADM, District Bilaspur vide Annexure P-2 (page 10 of the paper book) based on the documents furnished by Trishna Devi (respondent No.5) pertaining to Meera Devi, a separate inquiry had been got conducted to ascertain the genuineness and authenticity of the said documents.In this respect, it would be appropriate to refer to the relevant extracts 3 of the reply filed to the present writ petition on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 4, the relevant extract reproduced as under: 1…...According to the guidelines, the candidates applying for the post of Anganwadi Worker should be Matriculate and for the post of Anganwadi Helper should be Primary pass. The candidate should belong to same village or the feeding village where the Anganwadi Centre has been opened and none of the family member of the candidate should be in Govt./Semi Govt. service. The candidates should be belonging to a family which was legally separated as a separate family as per procedure laid down in the Panchayati Raj Act and Rules before 1st January 2004. The candidates for this post should be in the age group of 21-45 years and preference is to be given to the SC/ST/OBC/disabled and widow/state home in- mates/orphan/destitute and ward of ex-servicemen/freedom fighter for which separate marks have been kept under the guidelines. The annual income of the family of the candidate should not be more than 12000/-per annum. 10 ….That the matter was put up before the Chairman, Selection Committee i.e. SDM, Sadar Bilaspur to enquire into the family separation and income certificate of the petitioner which was conducted through Tehsildar, Swarghat Distt. Bilaspur H.P. The enquiry report as received from Tehsildar Swarghat stated that the family of the petitioner was separated on dated 18-10-2006 and it was a joint family as on dated 01-01-2004 and the earlier income certificate of her separated family has not been computed on the basis of the joint family. 12. ……..That there were three candidates who had appeared in the interview in the year, 2008, however, it is submitted that in compliance to the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate Bilaspur on dated vide which the selection committee was directed to look into the documents furnished by Smt. Trishna Devi pertaining to Meera Devi and, if needed a separate inquiry to ascertain their authenticity be also made, an enquiry into the income certificate of the petitioner was conducted through Tehsildar, Swarghat, and it was revealed in the enquiry that the family of the petitioner was living in a joint family and her father-in-law who was employed as a pump operator in the Department of Irrigation and Public Health was the part of the joint f amily and therefore, the petitioner was not eligible for the post of Anganwari Worker as for the eligibility for the post of Anganwari Worker,there should not be any member of the family of the applicants in the Govt. or Semi-Government service, hence the petitioner was not offered appointment as Anganwari Worker. The third applicant Smt. Veena Kumari was also not eligible for the 4 said post as she was married in the village outside the feeder area. 6. Reply was filed on 14.09.2018 7. No replication to the same has been filed. No challenge has been laid to the subsequent enquiry conducted by the Tehsildar Swarghat till date. 8. From the aforesaid, it is evident that based on inquiry conducted into the documents furnished by Trishna Devi- (respondent No.5) pertaining to Meera Devi, the income certificate on the basis of which the present petitioner had participated in the interview was found to be not depicting the correct portion. Besides the father in law of the petitioner was found to be employed as a pump operator and they were all living together in a joint family. Even Smt.Veena Kumari was found to be in eligible. No perversity /illegality has been pointed out in the aforesaid findings. 8. In view thereof present petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 13th July, 2026 (veena)