Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 130493 (ALL)

PUNAM VERMA ALIAS POONAM VERMA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND NUTRITION DEPTT. AND 4 OTHERS

WRIA/3322/2025 · 2025-03-27

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17644 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3322 of 2025 Petitioner :- Punam Verma Alias Poonam Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Child Development Services And Nutrition Deptt. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Amir Khan,Surya Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the respondents. The petition has been filed with the following main prayer:- "it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue any writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to reject her candidature for appointment on the post of Aganbadi Karyakatri on the ground that the income certificate, which is submitted along-with candidature form is not latest by six months before the advertisement as it is valid for the period of three years (mentioned itself in the income certificate) and also in the advertisement/requirement date 14.03.2024 no such type of condition is mentioned and to consider her case in accordance with law in the interest of justice." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite parties have not considered the petitioner’s case for appointment on the post of Anganwadi Karyakarti on the ground that the income certificate submitted by the petitioner is beyond the period of six months from the date of advertisement. It has been further submitted that the income certificate issued by the Tehsilardar which is contained in Annexure No. 4 to the petition, is valid for a period of three years and therefore, the petitioner’s claim should have been duly considered by the respondents. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel argues that, firstly, another candidate, Ruma Devi, wife of Mohit Kumar, has already been selected for the post in question. Perused the record. Upon examining the records, it appears that the income certificate submitted by the petitioner was issued on April 17, 2023, whereas the advertisement for the post was published on March 14, 2024. As per paragraph 3 of the Government Order dated March 21, 2023, the income certificate must be issued within six months prior to the date of advertisement. In this case, the certificate was issued beyond the prescribed six-month period and, therefore, does not comply with the terms of the advertisement and the Government Order. Consequently, the petitioner cannot be permitted to participate in the selection process. Furthermore, Ruma Devi, who has already been appointed to the post of Anganwadi Karyakatri, has not been impleaded as a respondent in the present petition. In light of the discussions made herein-above, I find no merit in the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh petition. Instructions provided by the learned Standing Counsel is taken on record. Order Date :- 27.3.2025 R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench