Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26970 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3988 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pooja Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Addl. Chief Secy. Gramya Vikas/Panchayati Raj Vibhag U.P. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Narendra Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 2. This Court, vide order dated 29.04.2025, passed the following order:- "By order dated 11.04.2025, this Court has directed to the learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions on the point that the respondent no.5, who has been appointed on the post of Aganwari Karyakatri as allegedly is not having the death certificate of her late husband. Learned Standing Counsel though has received written instructions but the same are silent on the query made by this Court on 11.04.2025. He prays three days' further time to seek instructions. List this case on 08.05.2025 as fresh. On the next date of listing, in case the required instructions are not provided, opposite party no.4/ Bal Vikas Pariyojna Adhikari, Parsendi, Sitapur shall appear in person to assist the Court." 3. Learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of written instructions, which are taken on record, submits that respondent no.5, Smt. Mangala Devi, was secured 16.551 marks for the post of Aganwadi Karyakatri based on her educational qualifications and her status as a BPL (Below Poverty Line) candidate, whereas, the petitioner, Smt. Pooja Devi, secured only 10.806 marks. 4. It is further submitted that the selected candidate was not given any preference on the ground of being a widow, particularly as she did not furnish her husband's death certificate. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the above submission and contends that, as per a letter dated NILL (Annexure-11), the District Programme Officer informed the District Magistrate, Sitapur, that Smt. Mangala Devi was selected on the basis of her status as a BPL widow. 6. Learned Standing Counsel submits that the letter appears to have been issued inadvertently. 7. Perused the record. 8. Although the letter contained in Annexure-11 appears to contradict the written instructions provided by the learned Standing Counsel, however, on perusal of the instructions received from the District Programme Officer, Sitapur and after considering the educational qualifications of both candidates, it is evident that the selected candidate possesses qualifications of Intermediate, Graduation and Post-Graduation, whereas the petitioner holds only Intermediate and Graduate degrees. Owing to her higher educational qualifications, the selected candidate has secured a higher merit score of 16.551. The instructions clearly states that the selection was made on the basis of BPL (Below Poverty Line) merit, and there is no reference to any preference having been granted to the selected candidate on the ground of her being a widow. 9. On the contrary, the select list, which is also on record along with the instructions, shows that the respondents has been selected only as BPL candidate on the basis of higher merit. The petitioner has admittedly scored lesser merit. The merit has been prepared strictly on the basis of educational qualification. I find no illegality in the selection of respondent no.5. 10. The writ petition, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench