IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 231 of 2010. Decided on: 3.3.2010 Promila Devi …. 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 Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr.G.R. Palsara, Advocate. For respondents No.1 to 4: Mr.R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.(Oral) The petitioner was initially selected and appointed as Anganwari Worker. That was challenged by the fifth respondent on the ground that the petitioner did not satisfy the income criteria. That was unsuccessfully pursued by the petitioner leading to Annexure P-1 judgment wherein it has been held by a judgment of this Court that the petitioner’s income exceeded the limit of Rs.12,000/-. However, liberty was reserved to the petitioner to assail the appointment of the fifth respondent on the allegation that the fifth respondent also had crossed the income of Rs.12,000/- as on the relevant date of selection, namely, July, 2007. That matter has been looked into 2 by the authorities concerned and finally the Deputy Commissioner has passed an order to the effect that the income of the fifth respondent, as on the relevant date, was only Rs.11,400/-. That computation has been made on the basis that the widow pension was at the rate of Rs.200/- per month at the relevant date, namely, July, 2007. The revision of the pension from Rs.200/- to Rs.300/- was made thereafter. We find no error in the finding of fact entered by the Divisional Commissioner that the fifth respondent’s income was below Rs.12,000/- as on the material date i.e. July, 2007. Therefore, there is no merit in the writ petition, which is dismissed accordingly. ( Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice. March 3, 2010 (V.K.Ahuja) (trs/bss) Judge