JAIWANTI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present civil writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenge has been laid to order dated 12.9.2011 (Annexure P-4), whereby an appeal having been filed by respondent No.4 Ms. Sarojana Devi, against the order passed by the Tehsildar Karsog, came to be decided.

(2.) Briefly stated facts, as emerge from the record are that pursuant to interview held on 10.8.2007, respondent No. 3 was appointed as Anganwari Worker at Anganwari Centre Shalani. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with selection of respondent No.3, petitioner herein filed appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Mandi, who while accepting the appeal quashed and set-aside the appointment of respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 being dissatisfied with aforesaid order passed by the Deputy Commissioner preferred an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner Mandi, bearing Miscellaneous Appeal No. 273 of 2008 under clause 12 of Scheme/Guidelines for engagement of Anganwari Workers/helpers.

(3.) The Divisional Commissioner vide order dated 20.2.2009 accepted the appeal and set-aside the order dated 22.2.2008, passed by the Deputy Commissioner and directed that respondent No.3 Smt. Sarojana, who was appointed by the select committee may be allowed to continue