VEENA DEVI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, is, aggrieved by the order, embodied in Annexure P-7, wherethrough, the Additional District Magistrate, Bilaspur, H.P., hence, upheld the cancellation, vis-a-vis, the income certificate, reflecting, the, family income, of, the husband of respondent No.5 herein to be Rs.40,000/-, hence, by the Tehsildar concerned, (I) and, also upheld the income certificate No.1405, dated 14.5.2007, showing the family income, of, respondent No.5, as Rs.8000/-, and, thereafter recorded a pronouncement, that, with the respondent No.5 herein, obtaining highest marks, in the merit list, as a corollary thereof, he made a direction, for respondent No.5 herein being issued, the, employment letter, for, the post of Aganwari Helper, at Aganwari Centre Parnali.

(2.) The gravamen, of, the onslaught, as, cast, by the petitioner herein, vis-a-vis, the afore order(s) is entirely rested, upon, an argument qua the income, if any, derived by the husband of respondent No.5 herein, from, his rendering services, as, a Home Guard volunteer, and, embodied, in the income certificate, to be borne, in a sum of Rs.40,000/- (a) being includable, for the relevant purpose, more so, for determining, the, eligibility of respondent No.5 herein.

(3.) However, the learned counsel for respondent No.5, has, countered the afore submission, and, the edifice of his afore submission is rested, (a) upon, the further factum, vis-a-vis, the allowances, and, honorarium, disbursable to the husband of the respondent No.5 herein rather suffering fluctuations, and, volatility, hence at certain stages, of, rendition of services, by the husband, of, the respondent No.5 herein, as, a Home Guard Volunteer, (b) and, hence, his being not reimbursed, any honorarium, and, allowances, and, thereupon, for ensuring qua the respondent No.5's family hence earning, a, decent livelihood, rather it would be unbefitting, to, compute income, if any, derived by her husband, by his rendering volunteer services, in, the Home Guard Department. The efficacy of the afore submission, is, effaced, by this Court, in a verdict rendered in a case titled as Reena Devi vs. State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 1778 of 2015-H, decided on 30.10.2015, rather, declaring that with the petitioner's husband's, discharging hence duties, as, Home Guard volunteer, and, his receiving daily allowances, in the nature of honorarium, rather rendering his allowances being includable, for, determining, the, income eligibility criteria, of, the aspirant concerned. Furthermore, the afore verdict, is also, in concurrence with the apt verdict rendered by the Hon'ble Principal Division Bench, of this Court, in a case titled, as, Smt. Reena Devi vs. State of H.P., LPA No. 12 of 2016, decided on 1st August, 2016, the relevant paragraph No.4 whereof, stands extracted hereinafter:-