IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. LPA No. 379 of 2011. Decided on: 15.12.2011. Susham Lata wife of Shri Suresh Kumar resident of village Dehra, Post Office Ghalour, Tehsil Jawalamukhi, District Kangra, H.P. …. Appellant. Versus 1. State of H.P. through its Secretary Social Justice and Empowerment, Shimla. 2. Child Development Project Officer, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. 3. Smt. Sakindra Devi wife of Shri Sanjay Kumar resident of village and Post Office Ghalour, Tehsil Jawalamukhi, District Kangra, H.P. …. Respondents. Letters Patent Appeal under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Rules as well as the Lahore High Court Rules as applicable to the High Court of Himachal Pradesh against the judgment of the Ld. Single Bench passed in CWP No.1150/2011 dated 01.09.2011. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, C. J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. For the Appellant : Mr. Dinesh Bhanot, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate Genera for respondents No.1 & 2. Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate for respondent No.3. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) The respondents were directed to produce the record only to ensure whether the appellant (petitioner in the writ petition) belongs to any of the feeding villages to Anganwari Centre Ghaloura. - 2 - Mr. Gian Chand Sharma, District Programme Officer, Kangra has produced the record. We have gone through the record. It is evident from the record that for Anganwari Centre, Ghaloura, the feeding villages are Ghaloura itself, Dahog and Blararu. The appellant does not belong to any of these villages. Thus she was not entitled for appointment to the post of Anganwari Worker. However, Mr. Dinesh Bhanot, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the family income of respondent No.3 is more than rupees twelve thousand. It is made clear that in the event of offering appointment to respondent No.3, her income shall also be verified by the District Programme Officer, Kangra. 2. Notice was issued to Tehsildar, Jawalamukhi why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him for not complying with the orders of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2011. In sequel thereto, Mr. Ram Singh, Tehsildar, Jawalamukhi is present. He has also filed reply. The same is permitted to be taken on record. Though the Court is not satisfied with the affidavit filed by him, however, taking into consideration the fact that he is at the verge of retirement, the notice is discharged. 3. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the L.P.A. is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 15, 2011. (sck).