CWP No.1321/2008. 01.09.2008 Present: Mr T.S.Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.R.K.Bawa, Advocate General with Mr.J.K.Verma, Deputy A.G., for the respondents. The petitioner was appointed as Anganwari worker. Objections were raised with regard to the income of the petitioner’s family. Accordingly, an appeal was filed before the Deputy Commissioner who after hearing the parties decided it and held that the petitioner’s family income is more than the amount prescribed. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner who dismissed the appeal on the similar grounds. Hence, this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised certain questions of facts before this Court with regard to the income of the petitioner. From the perusal of the documents on record, it is apparent that the petitioner’s husband is Group ‘D’ Contractor and he has carried out certain works even amounting to more than Rs.6 lacs. We are of the further opinion that this Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226, would not like to examine the findings of fact already recorded by the two Courts below. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to show any interference with the decision arrived at by the Courts below with respect to the income of the family. …2… In light of the above discussion, no interference is warranted and the writ petition is dismissed, so also the pending application. ( Jagdish Bhalla ), C.J. September 1, 2008. ( Kuldip Singh ), J. (soni)