Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26124 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4967 of 2025 Petitioner :- Renu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Bal Vikas Evam Pustahar Lko And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. In view of the proposed order being passed, notices to respondent No.8 is dispensed with. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the State-respondent. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is having all the requisite eligibility for being selected on the advertised post of Anganwadi Worker. He submits that respondent No.8 does not belong to below poverty line category however, the revenue authorities have issued the income certificate to the tune of Rs.39,000/- to her and on that basis she has been selected as a BPL category candidate whereas she has several properties, specific pleading in this regard has been made in paragraph 9 of the writ petition. A complaint is also stated to have been made by the petitioner to the District Magistrate which is on record as Annexure No.9. Learned standing counsel on the other hand has submitted that selection on the post in question has been made in favour of respondent no.8 as she has applied under BPL category and has secured highest merit and thus, has been placed at serial No.1 at the select list however, the petitioner has secured lesser merit than the respondent No.8. The selection has been done strictly in accordance with the Government Order dated 21.03.2023 para 3 ग (iii). He submits that the petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Perused the record. A perusal of the written instructions prima facie show that selection on the post in question has been done strictly on the basis of merit so also considering the BPL certificate issued in favour of the private respondents. The petitioner appears to be aggrieved by the manner in which the BPL certificate has been issued by the tehsil authorities for which the petitioner has already represented to the District Magistrate in Lok Adalat thus, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the selection of the respondent No.8 at this stage, however, direction is issued to the District Magistrate i.e. respondent No.3 to conduct an inquiry upon the complaint made by the petitioner regarding the BPL certificate issued in favour of respondent No.8 and while conducting the inquiry the allegations made in para 9 of the writ petition shall also be taken into consideration. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. The petitioner shall serve a certified copy to the District Magistrate within a period of a week from today along with the copy of the memo of writ petition. The decision shall be taken by the District Magistrate within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is made clear that the appointment, if any, shall be made subject to the outcome of this decision. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench