Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 447 (HP)

Leela Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2019-04-23

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY, VIVEK SINGH THAKUR

body2019
JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. In this writ petition order dated 5.3.2019 passed by learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sirmour district at Nahan (Appellate Authority under the scheme framed for appointment of Anwanwari worker/helper) is under challenge. 2. The petitioner and respondent No. 5 were candidates to the post of Anganwari Helper in Anganwari Center, Millah, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmour for which the interview was held on 20.2.2017. The petitioner was selected and appointed as Anganwari Helper in the said center. Her selection and appointment was challenged by respondent No. 5 on the ground that the income certificate she furnished was not genuine. 3. The Appellate Authority during the course of proceedings in the appeal sought report qua the income of the petitioner and private respondent from Tehsildar Shillai, District Sirmour. The inquiry was conducted by the Tehsildar. On the basis of the material collected during the course of inquiry the income of the petitioner and the private respondent was found more than the prescribed one i.e. Rs.35,000/- per annum from all sources. 4. The report was submitted to the Appellate Authority which was considered and made basis to dismiss the appeal filed by respondent No. 5 and also to quash the selection process held for the post of Anganwari Helper. The Child Development Project Officer, the 4th respondent has been directed to initiate fresh process to appoint suitable candidate as Anganwari Helper in Anganwari Centre, Millah with the observation that the impugned order shall not bar the petitioner and private respondent for applying afresh to the post subject to the condition that they fulfill the eligibility criteria. 5. Chapter 28 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Records Manual deals with the procedure prescribed for issuing various certificates including the income tax certificate. Para 28.11 of chapter 28 reads as follows: 28.11 If it is found during inquiry or otherwise, that any information given by the applicant is wrong, the certificate issuing authority shall cancel the certificate after passing a speaking order in this behalf and initiate proceedings against the delinquent under the law. In such a situation, the certificate earlier issued will be replaced by a copy of the cancelled certificate in the electronic record. 6. In such a situation, the certificate earlier issued will be replaced by a copy of the cancelled certificate in the electronic record. 6. Therefore, in terms of para 28.11 of this chapter in the event of during the course of inquiry the information supplied by an applicant for issuance of a certificate is held to be wrong, the certificate issuing authority shall cancel the certificate after passing a speaking order in this behalf and initiate the proceedings against the delinquent in accordance with law. In the case in hand the authority issuing the certificate is Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Shillai, District Sirmour. The said authority has issued only a report that the income of the petitioner and for that matter of the private respondent was over and above the prescribed limit i.e. Rs.35,000/- per annum. The income certificates issued in their favour were as such not cancelled and the appellate authority, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sirmour district at Nahan has rather accepted the report submitted by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade and cancelled the appointment of the petitioner as Anganwari Helper. Though it is deemed cancellation of the income certificates so issued in favour of the petitioner and also the private respondent, however, as per the further procedure prescribed under chapter 28 of the Manual against the cancellation of the certificate by the competent authority viz in the case in hand Assistant Collector Ist Grade the appeal is maintainable before the officer next higher in the hierarchy i.e. Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) the Appellate Authority. The relevant provisions contained in para 28.1 in this regard reads as follow: 28.1 The Tehsildar/Naib Tehsildar Mohal, Sub-Divisional Officer (C), Additional District Magistrate/Additional Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner concerned shall be the competent authorities to issue all kinds of certificates within their respective jurisdictions. The next higher officer in the official hierarchy shall be the appellate authority for adjudication upon refusal of an officer competent to issue the certificate for issuing a certificate or in case any person is aggrieved about issuance of a certificate to another person. 7. The next higher officer in the official hierarchy shall be the appellate authority for adjudication upon refusal of an officer competent to issue the certificate for issuing a certificate or in case any person is aggrieved about issuance of a certificate to another person. 7. Therefore, the appropriate course available in the matter of cancellation of the income certificates was to have held inquiry by the issuing authority i.e. the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Shillai into the authenticity and genuineness thereof and in the event of the information having been supplied by the petitioner and private respondent found to be incorrect, to have cancelled the same by affording them the opportunity of being heard. The decision to cancel the income certificates issued in their favour could have been challenged in an appeal maintainable before the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Shillai, District Sirmour in terms of the provisions contained in para 28.1 of Chapter 28 reproduced supra. However, the petitioner and private respondent seems to have not opted for filing an appeal. Their right of filing the appeal also seem to have escaped the notice of learned Appellate Authority and it is as a result thereof the report has been considered and made basis to dismiss the appeal preferred by the private respondent. She has not challenged the said order. As regards the ground of challenge thereto in this writ petition though we are satisfied therewith, however, do not want to enter upon the controversy on merits and leave it open to the petitioner to challenge the report of the Tehsildar in an appeal before appropriate forum in accordance with law, if so advised. 8. Being so, we find no illegality in the impugned order as learned Appellate authority has quashed the selection process and also the appointment of the petitioner as Anganwari Helper and ordered to initiate the process afresh in which the petitioner and private respondent, if eligible, will also participate. 9. Before parting, we direct the respondents-State to complete the selection process to be initiated afresh within two months. 10. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application (s), if any.