JAIWANTI Vs. HEERA MANI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of High Court of Judicature at Lahore applicable to the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, is filed against judgment dated 22.9.2016 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, in CWP No. 514 of 2016.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that the respondent No.1-petitioner (hereinafter, 'petitioner') filed a writ petition being CWP No. 514 of 2016, stating therein that she along with other persons appeared for interview to the post of Anganwari Worker in Anganwari Centre Janaul, under ICDS Block Seraj. Petitioner was appointed as such on 4.8.2007. Appellant (respondent No.4 in the writ petition) filed appeal against her appointment before Deputy Commissioner Mandi, who allowed the same on 17.4.208 and selection of petitioner was set aside. Petitioner filed further appeal before Divisional Commissioner, which was dismissed on 25.9.2008. Petitioner thereafter filed CWP No. 1949 of 2008, which was disposed of by remanding matter back to Deputy Commissioner with a direction to decide the same afresh, on 20.10.2008. Deputy Commissioner, on 16.3.2011, dismissed the appeal of present appellant, against which she approached Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, who also dismissed the appeal filed before him. Appellant filed CWP No. 9637 of 2012 and petitioner filed CWP No. 3575 of 2012, which were clubbed and decided on 26.11.2012, with the direction to Tehsildar to decide the status of petitioner, who, on the basis of report of Naib Tehsildar found income of appellant more than ceiling prescribed under the Rules occupying the field. Petitioner approached Sub Divisional Officer(Civil), who also dismissed her appeal and appellant was directed to join as Anganwari Worker. Petitioner challenged said order before Deputy Commissioner and Divisional Commissioner, both of whom, dismissed the claim of the petitioner.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved with the dismissal of her appeal by the Divisional Commissioner, petitioner approached this Court, by filing CWP No. 514 of 2016, on the ground that her appeal before Divisional Commissioner was within limitation, but same was dismissed on the ground limitation itself. In reply to the writ petition, respondents-State, along with other objections, it was averred that the appeal filed by petitioner before Divisional Commissioner was time barred and as such rightly dismissed.