IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 2887 of 2010 Date of decision: 22.07.2011 ________________________________________________________________ Anju Kumari. .....Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .....Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. ________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Y. Paul, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Dy. AG, for respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. Keshav Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. M.S. Guleria, Advocate, for respondent No. 5. V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral). The challenge herein in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is against selection of respondent No. 5 as Anganwari Worker in Anganwari Centre, Banjal, Tehsil and District, Chamba. Admittedly, the selection was made in the year 2007. Being aggrieved, it was challenged by the petitioner unsuccessfully before the Deputy Commissioner, Chamba, and thereafter before the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala. The only ground of challenge is that while submitting her application, respondent No. 5 had not annexed the original caste certificate and instead had submitted only a photocopy thereof. On the last date of hearing (20.06.2011) a direction was issued to respondents No. 1 to 4 to make available the records of the selection in question and respondent No. 5 to 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. ...2... produce the original caste certificate. Consequently, the records as well as the original caste certificate have been produced for perusal of this Court. 2. As per the scheme/guidelines for the engagement of Anganwari Workers/Helpers on honorarium under ICDS Scheme run by Social Justice & Empowerment Department, the applications are required to be submitted in accordance with Clause 6 of the said Scheme, wherein the requirement is that the application is to be accompanied by photocopies of all the requisite certificates from the authorized officers. In the present case also, respondent No. 5 had submitted photo copy of her caste certificate. Thus, there was no infraction or violation of the provisions of the Scheme. The original caste certificate produced by respondent No. 5 also goes to show that she belongs to 'Jogi' caste, which is recognized as Scheduled Caste. 3. In view of the above, no interference is warranted in this matter at the hands of this Court and the petition is accordingly dismissed, being without any merit. Whereas the latest caste certificate produced by respondent No. 5 is retained, the records of the selection are returned. 3. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of so also pending CMP(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 22nd July, 2011 (virender)