Anupam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Child Development and Nutrition Lko. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Anupam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Child Development and Nutrition Lko. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition dismissed; liberty granted to the petitioner to approach this Court again in case, during course of the inquiry, the complaint of the petitioner is found substantiated; the proposed inquiry is expected to be conducted expeditiously.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned selection of respondent Nos. 7 and 8 (OP Nos. 7 & 8) on the post of Aganwadi Karyakatri at AWW Centres Gaddipur and Daranagar, Gram Sabha Daranagar, Block Khairabad, District Sitapur should be quashed by writ of Certiorari, and a Mandamus issued commanding a fair/fresh selection. +1 more

Court's answer

Respondent No.7-Rinku Shukla (13.91%) and respondent No.8-Neeshu Yadav (19.58% on the unreserved seat) outperformed the petitioner (6.14%) in merit and have also joined their respective posts; the petition therefore lacks merit and is dismissed.

Ratio / Principle

Since the written instructions record the petitioner's domicile allegation against respondent No.7 as baseless (she is found to be a village-area resident per her documents) and the SDM, Tehsil Sadar, Sitapur has already been directed to inquire into her residence and income, no orders are required to be passed by this Court on that contention.

Key takeaways

The inquiry proposed (by the SDM, Tehsil Sadar, Sitapur into the residence and income of respondent No.7) is expected to be conducted expeditiously.obiter¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT - A No. 3958 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.; order dated 18.4.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:22172). Petitioner sought Certiorari quashing the selection of respondent Nos. 7 and 8 as Aganwadi Karyakatri at AWW Centres Gaddipur and Daranagar (Gram Sabha Daranagar, Block Khairabad, District Sitapur) and Mandamus for a fresh fair selection. Per written instructions under Government Order dated 21.03.2023: respondent No.7 (Rinku Shukla) secured 13.91% versus petitioner's 6.14% (Gaddipur); the Daranagar seat being unreserved, respondent No.8 (Neeshu Yadav) secured 19.58% versus petitioner's 6.14%; both selected candidates had joined their posts. PETITION DISMISSED as lacking merit. Domicile contention against respondent No.7 (urban residence / rural domicile certificate) not adjudicated upon: allegation found baseless in instructions, but SDM, Tehsil Sadar, Sitapur directed to inquire into her residence and income; inquiry to be expeditious; liberty reserved to petitioner to re-approach if the complaint is substantiated during inquiry.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22172

Court No. - 18

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3958 of 2025

Petitioner :- Anupam Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Child Development And Nutrition Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Tripathi,Shivangi Pandey

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

In view of the proposed order being passed, notices to respondent Nos.7 and 8 are dispensed with.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 6.

By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing thereby impugned selection of OP No-7 & 8 on the post of Aganwadi Karyakatri relating to AWW Centre Gaddipur and Daranagar, Gram Sabha Daranagar, Block- Khairabad, District- Sitapur, in the interest of justice. The true copy of the list of selected candidates is annexed as Annexure No-1.

ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding thereby the concerned respondent to make fair selection on the post of Aganwadi Karyakatri in AWW Centre Daranagar, Gaddipur and Madhawpur, Gram SabhaDaranagar, Block-Khairabad, District-Sitapurexpeditiously as possible, in the interest of justice."

Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of written instructions, has submitted that merit list for the post in question has been prepared in view of the Government Order

dated 21.03.2023. According to the prescribed procedure, respondent No.7-Rinku Shukla has secured 13.91% whereas Anupam, the petitioner has secured 6.14 % in merit and Rinku Shukla has been selected being higher in merit. One Neeshu Yadav, respondent No.8, has been selected on Daranagar Centre, the seat is unreserved category and anyone can apply for the said post wherein Neeshu Yadav has secured 19.58 % whereas the petitioner has secured only 6.14%. Thus, on both the centres of Village Daranagar because of lower merit, the petitioner cannot be selected.

He further submits that on both seats, the selected candidates have appointed and submitted joining on the aforesaid centres.

In view of above instructions, it is clear that respondent No.7-Rinku Shukla and respondent No.8-Neeshu Yadav have outperformed by the petitioner and have also joined on their respective posts, the petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

So far as the contention of the petitioner that respondent No.7 is not a resident of village area and is residing in urban area therefore, her domicile certificate of rural area could not have been issued is concerned, learned Standing Counsel submits that in the written instructions although the allegation of the petitioner has been found baseless and respondent No.7 has been found to be a resident of village area as per the documents provided by her however, in view of complaint of the petitioner, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Sitapur has been directed to be inquired about the residence and income of respondent No.7-Smt. Rinku Shukla thus, considering this statement no orders are required to be passed by this Court.

It is expected that the inquiry so proposed may be conducted expeditiously.

The liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach this Court again in case, during course of inquiry, the complaint of the petitioner is found substantiated.

Order Date :- 18.4.2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench