IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.16464 of 2011
Date of Decision: September 05, 2011
Poonam
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Mr.R.K.Hooda, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
*****
RANJIT SINGH, J.
A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Darshana
Devi Versus State of Haryana and others , 2009 (1) PLR 174 has
held on the basis of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
State of Karnataka Versus Ameerbi, (2007) 11 SCC 681 that the
person working as Anganwari worker does not hold a civil post and
the recruitment process is not governed by the Constitution or any
Statute. That being the position, the writ petition could not be held
maintainable as the authorities are not instrumentalities of State to
be amenable to the definition of “State” under Article 12 of the
Constitution of India.
Counsel for the petitioner, if so advised, may avail the
alternative remedy as may be available to the petitioner in
accordance with law.
The writ petition is, thus, dismissed with liberty to the
petitioner to have the alternative remedy.
September 05, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE