Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30136 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5052 of 2025 Petitioner :- Neelam Chauhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Gramya Vikas Vibhag Lko. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Pratap 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 5. Notice to respondent no.6 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order. 2. Vide order dated 09.05.2025, this Court recorded the gist of the case, which is extracted below: "Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was placed at Serial No. 1 in the select list. However, she has been orally informed that her appointment cannot be made, and that the post will instead be offered to another candidate from the general category due to a subsequent change in reservation. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the advertisement was published on 14.10.2024, and the reservation policy cannot be altered after the issuance of the advertisement. Learned Standing Counsel,though has instructions, however, the instructions are silent on that point and therefore, he is directed to seek fresh instructions on this point. Put up on 16.05.2025 as fresh." 3. Learned Standing Counsel has now provided written instructions, which are taken on record. 4. A perusal of the written instructions shows that the advertised post was under the EWS (Economically Weaker Section) category. There has been no change in the reservation status of the post in question. The petitioner does not belong to the EWS category. 5. The instructions further reveal that since no EWS candidates were available, and Smt. Rani Pathak was the only candidate from the general (unreserved) category, she has been selected. The other candidates belonged to the Scheduled Caste and Other Backward Classes categories. Therefore, the Selection Committee did not select those candidates against the post reserved for the EWS category. 6. Furthermore, the instructions refer to the 103rd Constitutional Amendment, which provides 10% reservation for EWS candidates. Consequent to this, the State Government issued an order dated 23.10.2019, stating that if suitable EWS candidates are not available in a particular selection year, the vacant posts shall not be carried forward as backlog but shall instead be filled from among the eligible unreserved candidates. 7. In view of the above, since there was no eligible EWS candidate, the post in question has rightly been filled by the selected candidate, who was the only eligible unreserved category applicant. There appears to be no illegality in the selection process. 8. The petition, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench