IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2845 of 2011 Date of decision: May 4, 2011. Naresh Kumari ….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others ……Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, A.G. with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G., for respondents No. 1 to 6. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved since her appointment as Anganwari Worker has been cancelled by the third respondent. That step appears to have been taken based on Annexure P-7, order, passed by the Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate, wherein it has been found that at the relevant time, the petitioner’s income exceeded Rs.12000/-. According to the petitioner, computation of income is not proper and that the order is issued without taking into consideration the relevant factors and considering irrelevant factors. This aspect, the petitioner may pursue before the Deputy Commissioner, …2… Kangra. In the event of petitioner pursuing the matter, as above, before the Deputy Commissioner, Kangra within a period of two weeks from today, the matter will be considered by the said authority with notice to the petitioner and respondents No. 6 and 7. Needless to say that depending on the action, thus, taken by the Deputy Commissioner, Annexure P-6 would be liable to be reviewed by the third respondent. Implementation of Annexure P-6, necessarily will be subject to the action, thus, taken by the aforesaid Authority and it shall be so made clear in the proceedings. 2. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s) if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice May 4, 2011 (Justice V.K. Ahuja) (pankaj/bss) Judge