Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22494 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4247 of 2025 Petitioner :- Renu Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Bal Vikas Evam Pushtahar Vibhag U.P. Lko. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Durgesh Mishra,Abhishek Shukla,Manvendra Mishra,Saumya Singh 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 respondent nos. 1 to 6. 2. Notice to respondent no.7 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order. 3. Through this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- "I. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the Final Selected Candidate List for the post of Anganwadi Recruitment 2024, Project Aspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh, dated 19.03.2025 to the extent of Gram Panchayat / Ward - Diyawa, Center Name - Diyava-2 after summoning the same from the office of Opposite Party No. 5, in the interest of justice. II. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Opposite Party No. 3 to consider the application / representation dated 20.03.2025 of petitioner and thereafter appoint the petitioner for the post of Anganwadi Recruitment 2024 in Vacant Centre Diyava-2, Gram Panchayat / Ward - Diyawa, Project Aspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh (Annexure No. 1), in the interest of justice. III. to issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just, fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case; IV. to allow the Writ Petition with costs." 4. Submission of learned Standing counsel, on the basis of written instructions, which is taken on record, is that submits that the petitioner's claim that respondent no. 7 had applied for Anganwadi Centre-Diyawan I is entirely misconceived. Both the petitioner and respondent no. 7 applied for Anganwadi Centre-Diyawan II of Gram Sabha Diyawan. He further submits that the selection process prioritized merit marks and income certificates. Respondent no. 7, Mrs. Mamta Yadav, was selected by the District Selection Committee due to having the highest marks in merit. Respondent no. 7 secured 18.86 marks, while the petitioner secured 18.3 marks. Therefore, respondent no. 7 was selected based on higher merit. 5. Perused the record as well as the instructions provided by learned Standing Counsel. 6. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, the Government Order dated 21.3.2023 and the fact that the petitioner scored lower marks than respondent no. 7, this Court finds no illegality in the selection of respondent no. 7. 7. The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 21.4.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench