Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 206 (ALL)

ANITA VERMA v. STATE OF U. P.

2017-01-16

RAJAN ROY, SHABIHUL HASNAIN

body2017
JUDGMENT : Heard Shri D.C.Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. This petition has been filed praying for quashing the order dated 18.08.2004 passed by the opposite party No.2 as contained in the annexure No.1 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed that annexure Nos. 3 & 4 may also not be given effect to and she further prayed that the other opposite parties may allow the petitioner to continue as Aganwadi Karya Katri with a salary/honorarium. The facts of the case are that a post for Aganwadi Karya katri was notified and the petitioner alongwith other persons applied for the same. One of the condition necessary for such employment was that the applicant should have been below the poverty line. The income certificate submitted by the petitioner was found unsatisfactory and appointment was given to her and she joined on the post and started working. Subsequently, a complaint was made that the income certificate submitted by the petitioner was not correct and is not below Rs.20,000/- per year. Further, an inquiry was made and it was found by the Bal Vikas Pariyojna Adhikari, Bikapur, District- Faizabad vide report dated 30.07.2004, that the income certificate submitted by the petitioner is not correct and the income appears to be above Rs.20,000/-. On this count, the impugned order was issued canceling the income certificate issued earlier dated 23.01.2004. The petitioner challenged the above order before this Court in the instant writ petition. This Court vide order dated 30.09.2004 stayed the impugned order and the petitioner is continuing on the strength of the interim order. Counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party in which it was stressed that the subsequent inquiry dated 30.07.2004 find that the income of the petitioner is above Rs.20,000 per annum. It is this income certificate which is under the scrutiny of the Court. The Court finds that the inquiry has been made in a very cursory manner. No specific findings have been recorded. It has been simply said in the concluding part that it can be assumed that the Income of the petitioner is above Rs.20,000/- per annum. No calculation has been shown nor any specific finding has been given as to how the income exceeded Rs.20,000/- per annum. Further, what is actually the income of the petitioner has not been shown in such circumstances. No calculation has been shown nor any specific finding has been given as to how the income exceeded Rs.20,000/- per annum. Further, what is actually the income of the petitioner has not been shown in such circumstances. The subsequent inquiry report dated 30.07.2004 is totally dis-satisfactory and does not inspire confidence and it can not be relied upon. No other reason have been shown for cancellation of the income certificate of the petitioner. The case of the opposite party has failed. The petitioner has been able to make out her case. In view of above, the court finds that the impugned order deserves to be quashed. Accordingly, the petition is thus allowed. The order dated 18.08.2004, annexure No.1 is quashed.