( 2026:HHC:36600 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 14954/2026 Decided on: 27.08.2026 Vandna Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .....Respondents ………………………………………………………………………………… Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Ms. Nidhi Verma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J. Petitioner seeks to challenge the office order dated 18.08.2026 passed by respondent No.5-Assistant Collector, Second Grade, Tehsil Panjehra, District Solan, H.P. In terms of the said order, the income certificate issued on 11.08.2026 by the Assistant Collector, Second Grade, in favour of petitioner’s father-in-law, Sh. Madan Lal, S/o Sh. Gita Ram, reflecting the income of the family of Shri Madan Lal as not exceeding Rs. 50,000/- per annum, was cancelled. 2. Heard and considered the case file. 3. In terms of the pleadings and the case canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner’s father-in-law, Sh. Madan Lal, had applied for an income certificate. While furnishing his self- declaration, he declared his income from all sources as Rs. 54,000/- 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2026:HHC:36600 ) per annum. Based upon this self-declaration, an income certificate was issued in his favour on 01.04.2026 to the effect that the income of Sh. Madan Lal was Rs. 57,000/- per annum. Apparently, about four months later, Sh. Madan Lal again applied for an income certificate and, this time, furnished his self-declaration of having family income of Rs. 40,000/- per annum. On this basis, income certificate was issued to him for the second time on 11.08.2026, certifying that family income of Sh. Madan Lal did not exceed Rs. 50,000/- per annum. It appears that the petitioner, on that basis, applied for the post of Anganwadi Worker for Anganwadi Centre Jaiwal, falling within Gram Panchayat Baglehar. Respondent No. 6 lodged a complaint before Respondent No. 5, seeking cancellation of the income certificate dated 11.08.2026 issued in favour of petitioner’s father-in-law, on the ground that four months earlier, a different income certificate had been issued in his favour, reflecting his family income at Rs. 57,000/- per annum. The Assistant Collector, Second Grade, vide his office order dated 18.08.2026 (Annexure P-10), cancelled the income certificate issued on 11.08.2026. To a query of the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner informed that petitioner’s father-in-law, Sh. Madan Lal, has not taken any legal recourse against the impugned office order dated 18.08.2026 whereby the income certificate issued to him on 11.08.2026 was cancelled. Admittedly, the income certificate dated 11.08.2026 was 3 ( 2026:HHC:36600 ) issued in favour of Sh. Madan Lal, though reflecting the income of his family. This income certificate dated 11.08.2026 has been cancelled by respondent No.5-the Assistant Collector, Second Grade vide impugned order passed on 18.08.2026. The locus standi of the petitioner to assail the aforesaid office order, when the real applicant of the certificate, viz. her father-in-law, has no grievance to the impugned order, thus comes under the cloud. Furthermore, learned counsel for the petitioner admits that statutory remedy for assailing the impugned order dated 18.08.2026 passed by the concerned Naib Tehsildar is available under Clause 28.21 of Chapter 28 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Records Manual, 1992, which read as under: - “28.20. Cancelation of Certificate issued. In case the issuing authority, either on a complaint or on receipt of information from any source, has reason to believe that any certificate has been issued wrongly, he shall after making such enquiries and hearing such persons as considered necessary and after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the person to whom the certificate had been issued, cancel such certificate. 28.21. Appeal. A person aggrieved by such order may within a period of 30 days file an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer (C) to whom the Tehsildar/Naib Tehsildar is subordinate and the Sub-Divisional Officer (C), after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, reverse or confirm the cancellation order and such reversal or confirmation shall be final.” Representation enclosed at Annexures P-11 & P-12 cannot be construed as appeal preferred against impugned order dated 4 ( 2026:HHC:36600 ) 18.08.2026. Rather these representations are against the income certificate issued to one Sh. Ram Pal. In view of above, it is for the petitioner/aggrieved person to avail remedy of appeal before the appropriate Authority, in accordance with law, against the impugned order. This writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 27th August, 2026 (rohit)