Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22900 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4435 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Saroj Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Child Development Service And Nutrition And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajey Singh 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 prayers:- "Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing of the impugned order/letter No. 176, dated 16.04.2025 passed/issued by the opposite party No. 2 i.e. District Programme Officer, District-Bahraich whereby the candidature of the petitioner has been un-qualified and same has been cancelled, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties to re-consider the candidate of petitioner for the post of Anganwadi Worker in respect of Village Panchayat-Amdapur-3, Block-Payagpur, District-Bahraich, in the interest of justice. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite parties concerned to reserve one seat for anganwadi worker in Village Panchayat Amdapur-3, Block-Payagpur, District-Bahraich for the petitioner, during the pendency of present writ petition, in the interest of justice." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 16.04.2025 has been passed without proper application of mind. He has drawn attention of the Court towards the Government Order dated 21.03.2023, annexed as Annexure No. 7, wherein clause 13 clearly stipulates that the services of an Anganwari Karyakatri or Assistant Anganwari Worker shall be terminated if she is elected as a member of the Gram Sabha, Gram Pradhan, or to any other such post. It is further submitted that the petitioner is yet to be appointed as Anganwari Karyakatri, and even before such appointment could take place, she has been declared ineligible by the impugned order. He also submits that if the petitioner is appointed, she will resign from the elected post. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel has opposed the writ petition, arguing that if the petitioner is appointed as an Anganwari Karyakatri, her appointment would have to be cancelled due to her elected position, rendering the entire exercise futile. Therefore, she has rightly been declared ineligible. Perused the record. A perusal of clause 13 of the Government Order dated 21.03.2023 shows that the services of any person elected as a member of Gram Sabha, Gram Pradhan or any other such post shall automatically stand terminated from the date of taking the oath. It is undisputed that the petitioner has taken the oath as a member of Gram Sabha. Hence, in view of the stipulation in the Government Order dated 21.03.2023, the District Program Officer, Bahraich, has rightly concluded that the petitioner is not eligible for appointment as an Anganwari Karyakatri. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that if she is selected, she be allowed to join and subsequently she will resign under the terms of the Government Order, is wholly misconceived. There is no point in wasting one seat when ultimately it is admitted that the petitioner is elected member of Gram Panchayat. Permitting the petitioner to participate in the process of appointment on the post of Anganwari Karyakatri will be a futile exercise in view of the aforesaid discussions. The writ petition is utterly misconceived, lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 23.4.2025/R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench