In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh CWP No. 16124 of 2006 Date of Decision: October 12, 2006 Smt. Sushila Kumari …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT: Mr. Vikas Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. JUDGMENT M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved by the declaration that she has been declared ineligible for appointment as Anganwari Worker as is evident from the perusal of list of selected candidates, dated 19.6.2006 (P-4). She has made representation on 17.8.2006 (P-5) followed by reminder dated 5.9.2006 (P-6). It is claimed that orally she has been told the reason for her ineligibility, namely, that she does not have subject of Mathematics in her Matriculation Examination, which according to the learned counsel is wholly irrelevant for determining her eligibility. For the aforementioned purpose, representations have already been filed as noticed above. CWP No. 16124 of 2006 In view of the above and without commenting upon the merit of the controversy raised, we direct respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to consider and decide the representations made by the petitioner within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of the order is produced before them. In case respondent No. 3 is not competent authority to decide the representation then the same be forwarded to the authority competent to take a decision thereof. A detailed speaking order shall be passed disclosing the reasons for declaring the petitioner as ineligible, in accordance with law. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (M.M.S. BEDI) October 12, 2006 JUDGE Pkapoor 2